Bible says science cannot possibly know how many years since creation

dad · Mar 16, 2019

Speedwell said:
Weak in faith? Still being unpleasant, I see. It is almost as if you believed that the only reason to reject a literal reading of Genesis comes from science.

Paul said that if people were weak in faith regarding eating meats, then let them eat herbs. So we know that people are strong and weak in the faith. The evil end time leader will try to deceive not just the elect, but the very elect. So there are degrees of faith, service, and etc.

When people cannot accept the realities of the bible, such as when Elijah and Moses appeared to Jesus on the mountain, or the exodus, flood, Eden..etc...then I cannot consider their faith strong.

Speedwell · Mar 16, 2019

dad said:
Paul said that if people were weak in faith regarding eating meats, then let them eat herbs. So we know that people are strong and weak in the faith. The evil end time leader will try to deceive not just the elect, but the very elect. So there are degrees of faith, service, and etc.

When people cannot accept the realities of the bible, such as when Elijah and Moses appeared to Jesus on the mountain, or the exodus, flood, Eden..etc...then I cannot consider their faith strong.

We're not talking about historical events, we're talking about the text of the biblical narratives describing the events and disagreeing about the genre determination of those narratives.

Bringing in the events themselves is something of a red herring.

dad · Mar 16, 2019

Speedwell said:
We're not talking about historical events, we're talking about the text of the biblical narratives describing the events and disagreeing about the genre determination of those narratives.

Bringing in the events themselves is something of a red herring.

Jesus talked about 'from the beginning'. Genesis starts with the same phrase...'in the beginning'. It mentions that was when the heavens and earth were created. In case you may want to declare that there were millions of years between the beginning and when man was created, Jesus cleared that up.

Mr 10:6 -But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

The reason why science cannot possibly know the end or the beginning is very clear. Here it is right from the very mouth of Jesus.

Re 1:8 -I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Kylie · Mar 16, 2019

dad said:
Well, on the topic of the OP, the flaw in manscience is that they do not recognize God as creator, so they cannot tell us about when or how the universe or life started.

But you're just assuming that God did it all, aren't you? You start with an assumption, then use that as a basis to ignore anything that doesn't proceed from your assumption. It;'s just a way for you to ignore anything you don't

There is no merit to blindly doubting all historical and biblical records of spirits and spiritual occurrences.

But it's foolish to accept old stories of extraordinary events without having a good enough to believe them.

Nor is there merit in trying to use physical only science of the present age to determine the veracity of such records.

Feel free to propose another method of verification. All I ask is that you show me how your method produces reliable results.

The important factor in a science forum is that science cannot tell us anything about spirits or the records of the past about them. Therefore, one could never hold up science as any judge or authority on the issue.

Outside the little realm of science, untold hundreds of millions of people have found validity in God's word and presence as a result of that word. So it works. One cannot deny rationally that there is something there.

The fact that lots of people believe is not evidence that it is real.

Lots of people believe that vaccines cause autism, or that the Earth is flat. Doesn't mean they are right.

That's why we need EVIDENCE.

dad · Mar 16, 2019

Kylie said:
But you're just assuming that God did it all, aren't you? You start with an assumption, then use that as a basis to ignore anything that doesn't proceed from your assumption. It;'s just a way for you to ignore anything you don't

The OP started with a verse not an assumption. Science has ignored the bible and the spiritual.

But it's foolish to accept old stories of extraordinary events without having a good enough to believe them.

Not really. Reason demands that there is something behind all the stories. It can't be nothing. There are millions of people as we speak that will tell you they had a spiritual encounter or experience. You simply cannot wave it all away just because it doesn't fit into your little box of beliefs.

Feel free to propose another method of verification. All I ask is that you show me how your method produces reliable results.

Let's say there is no way to verify what happens thousands and thousands of years ago. That does not mean that no spirits interacted with men! People today test the bible all the time. If it says God will send us great peace, for example, if we trust in Him, that is verifiable! If we trust Him and get great peace...bingo.

The fact that lots of people believe is not evidence that it is real.

Apply that to the beliefs of science. You cannot run around assuming all other beliefs have no merit.

Lots of people believe that vaccines cause autism, or that the Earth is flat. Doesn't mean they are right.

If neither science nor the bible support beliefs, they lose significance.

That's why we need EVIDENCE.

Evidence is people testing and experiencing things spiritual. When it comes to people long ago in ancient history we cannot now verify their records with science.

We can use the tested realities of spiritual encounters and experiences today as a basis to accept that there is some reality to the records of yesterday.

Kylie · Mar 17, 2019

dad said:
The OP started with a verse not an assumption. Science has ignored the bible and the spiritual.

No, you started with an assumption that the verse was accurate, that it was factually true.

Not really. Reason demands that there is something behind all the stories. It can't be nothing. There are millions of people as we speak that will tell you they had a spiritual encounter or experience. You simply cannot wave it all away just because it doesn't fit into your little box of beliefs.

Then do you really think that Hogwarts is real? That there are really Klingons and Cylons out there in space? That Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck are really arguing about whether it's rabbit season or duck season? Of course not. Because you have the brains to know that stories do not have to be factually true. Yet you seem to forget this when it comes to things which agree with the religious beliefs you've had.

Let's say there is no way to verify what happens thousands and thousands of years ago. That does not mean that no spirits interacted with men! People today test the bible all the time. If it says God will send us great peace, for example, if we trust in Him, that is verifiable! If we trust Him and get great peace...bingo.

And what about all those people who trust him and get zip. I guess that proves you wrong, huh?

Apply that to the beliefs of science. You cannot run around assuming all other beliefs have no merit.

I don't assume that science has merit. I conclude that it has merit based on a track record of consistent and accurate results, which is more than what religion has.

If neither science nor the bible support beliefs, they lose significance.

No, if some idea is not supported by testable and repeatable evidence, it loses significance.

If the only reason we have to believe that something is true is because someone says, "I tried it and it worked for me," then that is not enough. If lots of other people try the same thing and they get different results, then the original claim becomes even more dubious.

You don't seem to understand how evidence works, despite having been told how it works many times. Why do you think that is?

Evidence is people testing and experiencing things spiritual. When it comes to people long ago in ancient history we cannot now verify their records with science.

And if this spiritual stuff was a real thing, if it existed independently of the people rather than just being figments of their imagination, then would they all have the same experience? So why is it that there are countless different opinions on it? Objective reality doesn't have so many variations. Everyone can agree on how long it takes the Moon to orbit the Earth. There is no disagreement in that, and yet there is very little agreement in spirituality. That suggests that the conclusions people have reached about spirituality are just opinions, not facts.

We can use the tested realities of spiritual encounters and experiences today as a basis to accept that there is some reality to the records of yesterday.

First of all, you can't test spirituality. Your only suggested test - to get lots of people to try it - fails because of you get lots of people to try spirituality, you get lots of different conclusions, and that is what we'd get if it was all imagined, not what we'd get if it was real.

Secondly, even if you were right about that, you are still giving it too much credence. You say that it would be enough to accept SOME reality to the spiritual records, but while you say that, your actions say otherwise, since you apparently conclude that ALL of the extraordinary claims from such records as literal fact.

dad · Mar 18, 2019

Kylie said:
No, you started with an assumption that the verse was accurate, that it was factually true.

What has that got to do with science? Have you some reason to declare God is a liar?

Then do you really think that Hogwarts is real? That there are really Klingons and Cylons out there in space?

I know the difference between deliberate fiction and fact.

That Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck are really arguing about whether it's rabbit season or duck season? Of course not. Because you have the brains to know that stories do not have to be factually true. Yet you seem to forget this when it comes to things which agree with the religious beliefs you've had.

Comics are not meant to be seen a true. God's word is.

And what about all those people who trust him and get zip. I guess that proves you wrong, huh?

No such thing. He has our backs. If we don't get some silly thing we lust after it is for our own good.

I don't assume that science has merit. I conclude that it has merit based on a track record of consistent and accurate results, which is more than what religion has.

Yet it doesn't even deal with God or the spiritual or history or creation. How meaningful is that when they start spouting off diabolical anti Genesis fables?

No, if some idea is not supported by testable and repeatable evidence, it loses significance.

The first life form and the reason your fantasy big bang happened are shot in the heart by your statement. The bible is safe though, because science cannot begin to test Genesis or spirits etc.

If the only reason we have to believe that something is true is because someone says, "I tried it and it worked for me," then that is not enough. If lots of other people try the same thing and they get different results, then the original claim becomes even more dubious.

The repeated tests and observations of God in lives of men are evidence. The mere fact science cannot or wil see it is of zero consequence.

You don't seem to understand how evidence works, despite having been told how it works many times. Why do you think that is?

Cause those who told me would not recognize actual evidence if it bit their nose.

And if this spiritual stuff was a real thing, if it existed independently of the people rather than just being figments of their imagination, then would they all have the same experience?

No. Why would everyone on earth meet the same spirit, or have lives that were the same in every way?

So why is it that there are countless different opinions on it?

Why did Pharisees order a hit on Jesus? Why were they not happy He raised the dead and healed on the Sabbath day?

Objective reality doesn't have so many variations.

Since everyone on earth is different, it is required and expected that their lives and experiences would not be the same actually.

Everyone can agree on how long it takes the Moon to orbit the Earth. There is no disagreement in that, and yet there is very little agreement in spirituality. That suggests that the conclusions people have reached about spirituality are just opinions, not facts.

Miracles and decisions involve individuals, not the planet. When I decided to get saved, I think the moon kept doing what it does!

First of all, you can't test spirituality.

No? How come Moses got God to write stuff on a tablet? How come Lazarus was raised from being dead? I think you mean science cannot test things of a spiritual nature. I sure can.

Your only suggested test - to get lots of people to try it - fails because of you get lots of people to try spirituality, you get lots of different conclusions, and that is what we'd get if it was all imagined, not what we'd get if it was real.

Most people on earth since ever there was a man living here tried it. The records record it. Are you from down under? If so, maybe check out a Hillsong concert, lots of people seem to claim they get some effect from worship music.

Secondly, even if you were right about that, you are still giving it too much credence. You say that it would be enough to accept SOME reality to the spiritual records, but while you say that, your actions say otherwise, since you apparently conclude that ALL of the extraordinary claims from such records as literal fact.

Not at all. The only record that is fact is Scripture. The pagan historical records are not to be taken as gospel, but they do contain realities of life nevertheless that we can glean. Long lifespans for example in Sumer. For actual lifespans we would rely on Scripture. But the incredible length of lives in the Sumerian records can tell us that something was quite different than today.

Kylie · Mar 18, 2019

dad said:
What has that got to do with science? Have you some reason to declare God is a liar?

I have no reason to think God is real in the first place.

You can't expect me to begin with an assumption. If you want me to accept some premise, you must provide evidence to support that premise.

I know the difference between deliberate fiction and fact.

And maybe in 2000 years people will believe Hogwarts really existed, since all knowledge of the author's intent will have been lost.

Comics are not meant to be seen a true. God's word is.

Unsupported claim.

No such thing. He has our backs. If we don't get some silly thing we lust after it is for our own good.

Yeah, all those parents begging God to cure their kid's cancer, they're just lusting after some silly thing...

Yet it doesn't even deal with God or the spiritual or history or creation. How meaningful is that when they start spouting off diabolical anti Genesis fables?

Science deals with reality. If you want science to investigate God and spirituality, you must first show that they are real.

The first life form and the reason your fantasy big bang happened are shot in the heart by your statement. The bible is safe though, because science cannot begin to test Genesis or spirits etc.

If you are holding up unfalsifiability as a virtue, you really have no idea how science works.

The repeated tests and observations of God in lives of men are evidence. The mere fact science cannot or wil see it is of zero consequence.

Anecdote is not evidence.

Cause those who told me would not recognize actual evidence if it bit their nose.

Define evidence for me. How can I tell if something is valid evidence or nonsense to be discarded?

No. Why would everyone on earth meet the same spirit, or have lives that were the same in every way?

Lots of people have encountered dogs, and different dogs, and yet the descriptions of dogs are quite consistent. Often kept as pets, we can easily determine if an animal is a dog... Your argument doesn't exactly make sense.

Why did Pharisees order a hit on Jesus? Why were they not happy He raised the dead and healed on the Sabbath day?

Are you trying to make a point here?

Since everyone on earth is different, it is required and expected that their lives and experiences would not be the same actually.

Then why doesn't the same thing happen with maths, or engineering, or nutrition? Why don't we find that death cap mushrooms are actually good for some people? Your argument is full of holes.

Miracles and decisions involve individuals, not the planet. When I decided to get saved, I think the moon kept doing what it does!

So what? Are you saying that any miracle is entirely in your imagination? Jesus walking on water was a miracle, right? So that can be measured and observed by lots of other people. Again, your counterarguments have no substance.

No? How come Moses got God to write stuff on a tablet? How come Lazarus was raised from being dead? I think you mean science cannot test things of a spiritual nature. I sure can.

Here you go again, taking claims and assuming that they are true in order to use them as premises to try to prove your conclusion.

Most people on earth since ever there was a man living here tried it. The records record it. Are you from down under? If so, maybe check out a Hillsong concert, lots of people seem to claim they get some effect from worship music.

Sure, most people have tried it. And sure, they felt something.

But if it was real, then doncha think they'd experience the same thing? You get lots of people to try a particular drug, and they're mostly gonna report very similar effects. Why don't people have the same spirituality if what you say is true?

And you don't need spirituality to get an effect from going to church.

Not at all. The only record that is fact is Scripture. The pagan historical records are not to be taken as gospel, but they do contain realities of life nevertheless that we can glean. Long lifespans for example in Sumer. For actual lifespans we would rely on Scripture. But the incredible length of lives in the Sumerian records can tell us that something was quite different than today.

You haven't even come close to showing that scripture is fact. You've just loudly claimed it many times.

dad · Mar 18, 2019

Kylie said:
I have no reason to think God is real in the first place.

You can't expect me to begin with an assumption. If you want me to accept some premise, you must provide evidence to support that premise.

And maybe in 2000 years people will believe Hogwarts really existed, since all knowledge of the author's intent will have been lost.

Unsupported claim.

Yeah, all those parents begging God to cure their kid's cancer, they're just lusting after some silly thing...

Not at all. If they know they taught their child about the Savior then they know they are getting a new eternal body and will live in the land of love ever after with no more pain or sickness or death.

Science deals with reality. If you want science to investigate God and spirituality, you must first show that they are real.

Their idea of real ignores reality.

If you are holding up unfalsifiability as a virtue, you really have no idea how science works.

Bogus term in relation to creation or spiritual issues.

Define evidence for me. How can I tell if something is valid evidence or nonsense to be discarded?

Those who handled and saw and touched and talked to Jesus lived for years in constant evidences. So do millions of people today who decided to know God.

Lots of people have encountered dogs, and different dogs, and yet the descriptions of dogs are quite consistent. Often kept as pets, we can easily determine if an animal is a dog... Your argument doesn't exactly make sense.

Dogs, science can deal with. But that does not equip them to talk about eternity or God or spirits.

Then why doesn't the same thing happen with maths, or engineering, or nutrition? Why don't we find that death cap mushrooms are actually good for some people? Your argument is full of holes.

Maths We are individuals and not all made in some widget factory.

So what? Are you saying that any miracle is entirely in your imagination? Jesus walking on water was a miracle, right? So that can be measured and observed by lots of other people. Again, your counterarguments have no substance.

Right, soon as science can go back there on that lake and watch what happened they can start measuring! Meanwhile Peter was there and John and others, and they saw. You really think the ignorance of science is some excuse for blind denial?

But if it was real, then doncha think they'd experience the same thing?

No. Why would a person experience the same thing if they invited a demon into their heart as they would if they invited Jesus in?? Why would God, who knows what we need give the same gift to all?

You get lots of people to try a particular drug, and they're mostly gonna report very similar effects. Why don't people have the same spirituality if what you say is true?

The folks in ancient history reported kings that were gods or spirits. How would I experience that now?? The bible does cite some traits that would be exhibited in people who yielded to His Spirit though. Peace, love, longsuffering, patience, gentleness and etc.

And you don't need spirituality to get an effect from going to church.

Or the bank...so?

You haven't even come close to showing that scripture is fact. You've just loudly claimed it many times.

Those christian scientists who work in various fields related to origin issues would theoretically value what the bible says. So when the OP cites God's word saying man cannot know the beginning or end, they ought to admit science really doesn't know.

Kylie · Mar 19, 2019

dad said:
Not at all. If they know they taught their child about the Savior then they know they are getting a new eternal body and will live in the land of love ever after with no more pain or sickness or death.

Again, it is a claim, not a fact.

Their idea of real ignores reality.

Once again you resort to "Fraid not!" instead of producing any real arguments.

Bogus term in relation to creation or spiritual issues.

Thank you for proving my point.

Those who handled and saw and touched and talked to Jesus lived for years in constant evidences. So do millions of people today who decided to know God.

No, it is claimed that those who saw Jesus did.

Dogs, science can deal with. But that does not equip them to talk about eternity or God or spirits.

So special pleading.

Maths We are individuals and not all made in some widget factory.

Yes we are, it's called a uterus.

Right, soon as science can go back there on that lake and watch what happened they can start measuring! Meanwhile Peter was there and John and others, and they saw. You really think the ignorance of science is some excuse for blind denial?

Or how about they just do it with the alleged miracles that happen today?

No. Why would a person experience the same thing if they invited a demon into their heart as they would if they invited Jesus in?? Why would God, who knows what we need give the same gift to all?

Ah, so anyone who agrees with you has invited Jesus in, and anyone who disagrees with you has invented a demon in. Brilliant logic there...

The folks in ancient history reported kings that were gods or spirits. How would I experience that now??

Just believe it!

Oh wait, you only choose to believe the things that agree with what you have already decided is true.

The bible does cite some traits that would be exhibited in people who yielded to His Spirit though. Peace, love, longsuffering, patience, gentleness and etc.

Except you don't need a belief in God to be peaceful, loving, patient, gentle, etc do you?

Or the bank...so?

So you can't use people's experiences at church to justify that what they are worshipping is real.

Those christian scientists who work in various fields related to origin issues would theoretically value what the bible says. So when the OP cites God's word saying man cannot know the beginning or end, they ought to admit science really doesn't know.

I can't figure out what this has to do with what I said.

You don't provide any support for your claims. I've never seen you provide any. You just make the claim loudly, declare other people wrong, and think that asking people to support a claim you disagree with is somehow evidence for your claims.

Also, you are the OP in this thread. It looks really weird when you refer to yourself in the third person.

dad · Mar 19, 2019

Kylie said:
Again, it is a claim, not a fact.

Once again you resort to "Fraid not!" instead of producing any real arguments.

Thank you for proving my point.

No, it is claimed that those who saw Jesus did

Science has what to say about this? It is a real argument to point out what science can and cannot cover. The OP did that, using words from the Almighty.

So special pleading.

Only if you claim that anything poor little science cannot cover is special.

Yes we are, it's called a uterus.

The belly does not install personalities, traits and characteristics.

Or how about they just do it with the alleged miracles that happen today?

What are they waiting for? So let's say they followed someone around, and that person had some vision, or revelation, or healing, or miraculous event happen to them. Science would have no way of knowing. They also would try to grasp at wild explanations based on their belief set as to what may have happened, or explain it away as having not happened. You might as well ask a monkey.

Ah, so anyone who agrees with you has invited Jesus in, and anyone who disagrees with you has invented a demon in. Brilliant logic there...

If they claim a spiritual experience and what we see is evil results, I suspect the Spirit they opened up to was not the Good Spirit. Elementary.

Oh wait, you only choose to believe the things that agree with what you have already decided is true.

Why obsess on belief and why or whether others believe in a science forum?

Except you don't need a belief in God to be peaceful, loving, patient, gentle, etc do you?

Perhaps man can light a barn with a small candle, but we should not compare that to the burning light of the sun.

So you can't use people's experiences at church to justify that what they are worshipping is real.

Why, what exact experience are you talking about that happens in some building??

Also, you are the OP in this thread. It looks really weird when you refer to yourself in the third person.

The OP is about what the Almighty said man cannot know.

Kylie · Mar 19, 2019

dad said:
Science has what to say about this? It is a real argument to point out what science can and cannot cover. The OP did that, using words from the Almighty.

And again - all you have are claims. You have nothing more than an old story. You have no evidence to support it.

Only if you claim that anything poor little science cannot cover is special.

You don't actually know what special pleading is, do you?

What are they waiting for? So let's say they followed someone around, and that person had some vision, or revelation, or healing, or miraculous event happen to them. Science would have no way of knowing. They also would try to grasp at wild explanations based on their belief set as to what may have happened, or explain it away as having not happened. You might as well ask a monkey.

You can't show me that any miracles have happened at all! Where are the demigods walking on water? Where are the dead people coming back to life?

If they claim a spiritual experience and what we see is evil results, I suspect the Spirit they opened up to was not the Good Spirit. Elementary.

Or maybe it's all imaginary.

Why obsess on belief and why or whether others believe in a science forum?

If you are so insistent on keeping this discussion about science, why did you start it off talking about God?

Perhaps man can light a barn with a small candle, but we should not compare that to the burning light of the sun.

You think soundbites are evidence now?

Why, what exact experience are you talking about that happens in some building??

You tell me, you're the one who brought it up. You were talking about the Hillsong concerts back in post 167.

The OP is about what the Almighty said man cannot know.

No, it's about your interpretation about what he allegedly said.

dad · Mar 19, 2019

Kylie said:
And again - all you have are claims. You have nothing more than an old story. You have no evidence to support it.

You don't actually know what special pleading is, do you?

You can't show me that any miracles have happened at all! Where are the demigods walking on water? Where are the dead people coming back to life?

Or maybe it's all imaginary.

If you are so insistent on keeping this discussion about science, why did you start it off talking about God?

You think soundbites are evidence now?

You tell me, you're the one who brought it up. You were talking about the Hillsong concerts back in post 167.

No, it's about your interpretation about what he allegedly said.

If you are questioning God saying man can't know the beginning or end, well, good luck with that. There are many places He points out that His ways are higher than ours and that man's wisdom is foolishness.

Kylie · Mar 20, 2019

dad said:
If you are questioning God saying man can't know the beginning or end, well, good luck with that. There are many places He points out that His ways are higher than ours and that man's wisdom is foolishness.

No, there are many place where you have been TOLD he points out those things. But you're just hoping the messenger was reliable in the first place, and you've got no actual evidence for that.

dad · Mar 20, 2019

Kylie said:
No, there are many place where you have been TOLD he points out those things. But you're just hoping the messenger was reliable in the first place, and you've got no actual evidence for that.

Your doubts about God and His word do not change the fact it contains certain things. Since many scientists are nominal believers, one would hope they can read the writing on the wall.

Kylie · Mar 21, 2019

dad said:
Your doubts about God and His word do not change the fact it contains certain things. Since many scientists are nominal believers, one would hope they can read the writing on the wall.

Lots of things contain lots of things.

You have not yet shown that the Bible is any different.

dad · Mar 21, 2019

Kylie said:
Lots of things contain lots of things.

You have not yet shown that the Bible is any different.

That was not on the itinerary in this thread. Nor making a horse drink after being led to water.

Kylie · Mar 22, 2019

dad said:
That was not on the itinerary in this thread. Nor making a horse drink after being led to water.

This thread is about you claiming that the Bible's claim about science is accurate. It is very much on you to support your position.

dad · Mar 23, 2019

Kylie said:
This thread is about you claiming that the Bible's claim about science is accurate. It is very much on you to support your position.

Any claim that the bible makes is accurate. That is not an issue. Whether you know it or not may be an issue to you. However since many people here and in the realm of science claim to reverence the bible and God, pointing out that it says that science is hopelessly inept and absolutely unable to know the beginning or end should help those people put science in perspective.

Kylie · Mar 23, 2019

dad said:
Any claim that the bible makes is accurate.

Here we go again. You make claims like this, but provide no evidence to support them. If you want me to take your arguments seriously, you must support every claim you make. Until then, you are just assuming that every claim in the Bible is true.

Bible says science cannot possibly know how many years since creation

Undefeated!

Well-Known Member

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Undefeated!

Defeater of Illogic

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency