God did not create from nothing

sjastro said:

Genesis is a story not a historical record as there is not a shred of evidence to support it.

Click to expand...

AV1611VET said:

Then why did Jesus quote from Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 as authoritative?

Click to expand...

AV1611VET said:

Um ... who went to Nineveh, pray tell?

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

Now, you're making things up, AV. There's nothing out in the Milky Way that says, "Look here, Jesus is Lord!"

We only know that Jesus is Lord because of His 1st Advent, during which He fulfilled prophecies since the time of Moses (or............. adam) that were vague, ambiguous and/or cryptic.

So, don't knock others for not seeing the not so obvious.

Click to expand...

Platte said:

Please just speak for yourself.

<Google AI>
Capitalizing the "H" in history typically distinguishes between what actually happened in the past (lowercase) and the academic study or constructed narrative of those events (capitalized). The difference often highlights varying philosophies about time and the human record. [1, 2]
The two uses represent distinct meanings:

• history (lowercase): Refers to the events of the past themselves—everything that has ever happened. It is simply the continuous progression of time, most of which goes unrecorded and forgotten (e.g., what you ate for breakfast a decade ago). [1, 2]
• History (capitalized): Refers to recorded history. This is the socially constructed narrative, the written accounts, and the formal study of the past that we choose to remember and analyze (e.g., the contents of a textbook or the curriculum of a college course).

I learn something everyday I read this board....now you have learned something too.

Click to expand...

• history (lowercase): Refers to the events of the past themselves—everything that has ever happened. It is simply the continuous progression of time, most of which goes unrecorded and forgotten (e.g., what you ate for breakfast a decade ago). [1, 2]
• History (capitalized): Refers to recorded history. This is the socially constructed narrative, the written accounts, and the formal study of the past that we choose to remember and analyze (e.g., the contents of a textbook or the curriculum of a college course).

2PhiloVoid said:

Because He was Jewish? What would we expect Him to do? Quote from Homer's Odyssey to establish God's authority?

Click to expand...

sjastro said:

Do you understand what a historical record is; evidently not. Historical records in the OT such as the Babylonian Captivity of the Jews are attested to by archaeological evidence found in Babylonian and Persian records which corroborate the OT account.

Click to expand...

sjastro said:

Genesis is a story not a historical record as there is not a shred of evidence to support it.

Given you have demonstrated of being totally confused when referencing sources like Einstein and AI by reaching the conclusion the speed of light has never been measured despite the value of 299,792,458 m/s being mentioned on numerous occasions, you are in no position of debating the science.

In the passage quoted, I've counted five logical fallacies, special pleading, strawman, false dichotomy, equivocation and cherry picking.
You are incapable of discussing the science as it is based on the simplistic reasoning creationism good equals science bad.

Click to expand...

• To synchronize these two clocks, you have to send a signal between them.
• That signal can only travel at the speed of light.
• Therefore, to measure the speed of light, you already need to know the speed of light. [1]

AV1611VET said:

You may want to catch up in the conversation.

Lamberth says God's creation speaks to us.

He said that after I made a post about geology crying out to us about the majesty of Jesus and all His works.

Click to expand...

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

Jimbob Jelliwig the 4th.

Click to expand...

Platte said:

Do you have little man disease? You keep talking about other people intelligence like your's is superior to others.

<Google AI>
No, the one-way speed of light has never been directly tested or measured. While the two-way (round-trip) speed of light is well-verified, measuring the one-way speed is currently impossible because it requires perfectly synchronized clocks at the start and end points. [1, 2, 3]

The "One-Way" Problem
To measure how fast light travels from point A to point B, you need to know exactly when it left and exactly when it arrived. This requires a clock at point A and a clock at point B. [1]

• To synchronize these two clocks, you have to send a signal between them.
• That signal can only travel at the speed of light.
• Therefore, to measure the speed of light, you already need to know the speed of light. [1]

Because of this circular logic, physicists cannot definitively prove that light travels at the exact same speed in every direction. [1]

The Einstein Convention
Because one-way speed is impossible to verify empirically, physicists use the Einstein Synchronization Convention. This is a universally agreed-upon rule that assumes the one-way speed of light is the same in all directions (isotopic) and matches the round-trip speed of roughly 299,792,458 meters per second. [1, 2]
However, physics works mathematically if you assume different speeds in different directions—such as light traveling instantaneously in one direction and at half the speed in the other—as long as the average round-trip equals c. [1]

The Search for Absolute Simultaneity
The inability to measure the one-way speed of light ties directly into the concept of relativity of simultaneity. Without a way to definitively synchronize separated clocks, the idea of two events happening at "the exact same time" depends entirely on your chosen reference frame and light-speed conventions. [1]
While direct measurement remains unachieved, some theories propose using rotational phenomena like the Sagnac effect (e.g., measuring light relative to a rotating earth or a hypothetical preferred reference frame) as a potential path to test light speed variations. [1, 2]

Click to expand...

AV1611VET said:

And if the Jews took Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 as authoritative, what's the problem with those who don't?

Click to expand...

AV1611VET said:

That ... explains your lack of understanding.

God made sure His people took the Gospel to the whole world.

Starting with Adam & Eve.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

I think God's creation expresses some things to us, but not perhaps in the way that you think it does.

Also, don't confuse your General Revelation with your Special Revelation. Paul wasn't referring to Special Revelation in Romans chapter 1. No, Special Revelation "cometh by hearing" and being moved by God's Spirit to accept the Gospel of Christ.

I think you already know this.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

Yes. I'm not surprised that someone like Moses (or even later Israelites) would have had a general (but very rough) idea about the historical succession of Empires and Ancient Near Eastern Geography that we have today through other, more archaeologically and anthropologically grounded research.

But this doesn't 'prove' that the Genesis narratives in chapters 1 to 3 are absolute history as we would think of it today, nor should we expect these narratives to be mirror descriptions of actual history or 'inerrant' in anything other than their prophetic and theological importance.

Click to expand...

Platte said:

I agree, it doesn't prove Genesis - but it does give strong evidence to its narrative. A narrative most would find ridiculous young - Creation only 6000 years ago....but then we learn that History only goes back 6000 years. and then we learn the first civilization in History is the same location as the garden of eden. Not proof but excellent compelling evidence.

Click to expand...

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

Going to pick apart your own AI answer because it's amazing that you can read something and ignore what is said:

• history (lowercase): Refers to the events of the past themselves—everything that has ever happened. It is simply the continuous progression of time, most of which goes unrecorded and forgotten (e.g., what you ate for breakfast a decade ago). [1, 2]
• History (capitalized): Refers to recorded history. This is the socially constructed narrative, the written accounts, and the formal study of the past that we choose to remember and analyze (e.g., the contents of a textbook or the curriculum of a college course).

Your choice in focusing on History versus history shows that you have no desire to actually engage in anything with intellectual honesty on this thread. Because your entire argument of "Oh, we have the History" ignores the ACTUAL history came before the History that shows that the Earth was categorically NOT created 6000 years ago in 6 days. Because the history of the Earth shows that it wasn't!

Click to expand...

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

And yet history goes back LONGER than 6000 years.

Click to expand...

Platte said:

Why would I have a conversation with you about unverified data - especially with you adding science fiction to the equation. Lets stick to the facts.

Click to expand...

Platte said:

There is no History that goes back longer than 6000 years. You would claim unverified history goes back further - but its simply unverified and based on unverified assumptions. It is remarkable that History only goes back 6000 years - but it is as I would expect since Creation was only 6000 years ago.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

For instance, the Jews of the 1st century during Jesus time were probably mixed on whether the earth was round according to Greek philosophers and thinkers or a bowl and flat according more ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian ways of thinking.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

But either way, I'm pretty sure even Jesus didn't know that the Earth and the other planets revolve around the Sun; nor did His apostles or disciples.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

And it's ok that we do today.

Click to expand...