Creation: Believe It or Not

Godexists

Active Member
Sep 11, 2015
57
4
57
✟8,287.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Creation: Believe It or Not

Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 1



The issue of origins is absolutely critical to all human thinking, human behavior and human life. It is the foundation of our existence. It is the foundation of our purpose. It is the foundation of our destiny. Without a right understanding of origins there's no way to comprehend ourselves. There's no way to understand our earth, our universe or the ultimate meaning of anything. 5

When it comes to explain the possible mechanisms and cause of origins, the physical universe, life and biodiversity, usually three options are mentioned. Chance, physical necessity, and creation through the intelligence, will and power of a conscient agent. Lets give a closer look at the three options.

Chance. What kind of causal power has chance ? Chance expresses the odds or likelihood of a event taking place. Chance isn't a thing or a mechanism or a physical being or a causal agent. It's not a directing force. Chance doesn't make anything happen. It's only a way to quantify the probability of a event taking place. But in modern thinking, chance is being transformed in the ingredient of evolution theory through random mutations, a causal ingredient of biodiversity. 2
Physical necessity is the term that is given to the situation where something is forced to take a certain course of action. Events that are conditioned by some values, forces, laws , norms or goals. In physics the concept of necessity was applied to cases of strict determination and restriction due to so-called causal laws. Its the hypothesis that the constants and quantities had to have the values they do, so that the universe and the earth could not take any other course, than the one it did. 1,3
Intelligent design/creation stands for guided, reason based , directed , planned , projected , programmed , information based, goal-constrained, willed causation by a conscient intelligent powerful eternal, non-caused agency. Chance and evolution could be a included mechanism in the intended goal, but that would in the end still be a intelligence-based process.

There are only these options when it comes to origins. Either is there a intelligent creator, or there is not. Those are the only options. If there is no God, then everything is a result of ..... what exactly ?
Chance , as exposed above, isn't a thing. Physical necessity could only act once a physical universe exists. Beyond the universe, there were no physical laws.

Once its granted that no thing has no causal powers, its evident the universe could not have emerged from absolutely nothing. Nobody times nothing equals everything is irrational to the extreme ( nontheless, some very "smart" people think that proposition makes sense, and write extensive books about the subject ). Or, behind this complex universe is an incomprehensibly intelligent and powerful eternal being who made everything.

Genesis 1:1 is unique in all literature, all science, and all philosophy. Every other system of cosmogony explaining the universe, whether in ancient religious myths or modern scientific models, starts with eternal matter, or eternal energy in some form. Only the book of Genesis starts with eternal God. Genesis then is the book of the origin of the universe.

In Genesis we find the origin of order, information, and complexity. There is order, there are physical laws that function of fixed rules, there is information, and there is life based on cells, that are equivalent to factories and complex irreducible machines. Order , coded information and complexity never arise spontaneously. They are always generated by a prior cause programmed to produce these things simultaneously.

We also find in Genesis the origin of life, the marvels of the reproductive process. The almost infinite complexity programmed into the genetic system of plants and animals are inexplicable apart from special creation by a great, supernatural, powerful intelligence.

Genesis tells us about the origin of man, the most highly organized and complex entity in the universe, the origin of marriage, the remarkable universal and stable institution of marriage as having been ordained by the Creator; the origin of evil. The origin of physical and moral evil in the universe is explained in Genesis as a kind of temporary intrusion into God's perfect world, allowed by God as a concession to the principle of human freedom and responsibility and also to manifest Himself as Redeemer of sinners as well as Creator. In the book of Genesis you find the origin of salvation by grace through God's mercy and a substitute. That's all in Genesis and it starts to show as God is merciful to Adam and Eve and doesn't kill them, even though they deserved to die for their sin. In the book of Genesis that we find the origin of language. How you go from apes to man not just making some physical transition, but developing language, how you go from grunting and making unintelligible noises to human speech. is unexplained by modern science as well. The gulf between the mindless, instinctive chattering of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic communication of man is absolutely and completely unbridgeable by any evolutionary process. You find in Genesis the origin of culture. You find here such things as urbanization, the development of metallurgy, music, agriculture, animal husbandry, writing, education, navigation, textiles and ceramics. All of that starts in the book of Genesis. You find in the book of Genesis the origin of religion. Both the true religion and false religions appear, first of all, in the book of Genesis.

Science knows nothing about origins. No wonder, when pressed hard, the last outcome most atheists come up with , is ignorance. We don't know yet. Science is working on it.

Open questions in biology, biochemistry, and evolution

Open questions in biology, biochemistry, and evolution

When methodological naturalism is applied, the only explanation for the origin of life is abiogenesis, and of biodiversity, Darwins Theory of evolution. Proponents repeat like a mantra : Evolution is a fact. If that were the case, there would exist far more convincing , clear scientific answers to almost all relevant scientific questions and issues. This is far from being the case. Based on scientific papers, quite a different picture arises. Instead of compelling answers, questionmarks and lack of understanding, generalized ignorance in regard of almost all relevant issues, and conceptual problems are the most common. Since the information is widely sparse and scattered amongst thousands of scientific papers, its not so evident that this is the factual state of matter. The general public is duped by effect slogans, that give the false impression of certainty of naturalism. The standard answer, when proponents of naturalism are confronted with this situation, is: "We are working on it". Or: "We don't know yet".

Objection: more possible causal mechanisms exist, maybe even a infinity.
Answer: What can be asserted without evidence, can be discarted without evidence.

Objection:the universe isn't obliged in any to conform to our model of reality. Just look at Einstein's relativity theories. They demonstrate that the universe can confound us. That justifies not become attached to any viewpoint.
Answer: Even if a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) is not fully understood, the possible mechanisms to explain our existence are still the same.

1. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049237X09704124
2. Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 1
3. Design from Fine-Tuning | Reasonable Faith
4. Grand Unified Theory - Wikipedia
5. Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 2
 
  • Agree
Reactions: pat34lee

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Creation: Believe It or Not

Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 1



The issue of origins is absolutely critical to all human thinking, human behavior and human life. It is the foundation of our existence. It is the foundation of our purpose. It is the foundation of our destiny. Without a right understanding of origins there's no way to comprehend ourselves. There's no way to understand our earth, our universe or the ultimate meaning of anything. 5

When it comes to explain the possible mechanisms and cause of origins, the physical universe, life and biodiversity, usually three options are mentioned. Chance, physical necessity, and creation through the intelligence, will and power of a conscient agent. Lets give a closer look at the three options.

Chance. What kind of causal power has chance ? Chance expresses the odds or likelihood of a event taking place. Chance isn't a thing or a mechanism or a physical being or a causal agent. It's not a directing force. Chance doesn't make anything happen. It's only a way to quantify the probability of a event taking place. But in modern thinking, chance is being transformed in the ingredient of evolution theory through random mutations, a causal ingredient of biodiversity. 2
Physical necessity is the term that is given to the situation where something is forced to take a certain course of action. Events that are conditioned by some values, forces, laws , norms or goals. In physics the concept of necessity was applied to cases of strict determination and restriction due to so-called causal laws. Its the hypothesis that the constants and quantities had to have the values they do, so that the universe and the earth could not take any other course, than the one it did. 1,3
Intelligent design/creation stands for guided, reason based , directed , planned , projected , programmed , information based, goal-constrained, willed causation by a conscient intelligent powerful eternal, non-caused agency. Chance and evolution could be a included mechanism in the intended goal, but that would in the end still be a intelligence-based process.

There are only these options when it comes to origins. Either is there a intelligent creator, or there is not. Those are the only options. If there is no God, then everything is a result of ..... what exactly ?
Chance , as exposed above, isn't a thing. Physical necessity could only act once a physical universe exists. Beyond the universe, there were no physical laws.

Once its granted that no thing has no causal powers, its evident the universe could not have emerged from absolutely nothing. Nobody times nothing equals everything is irrational to the extreme ( nontheless, some very "smart" people think that proposition makes sense, and write extensive books about the subject ). Or, behind this complex universe is an incomprehensibly intelligent and powerful eternal being who made everything.

Genesis 1:1 is unique in all literature, all science, and all philosophy. Every other system of cosmogony explaining the universe, whether in ancient religious myths or modern scientific models, starts with eternal matter, or eternal energy in some form. Only the book of Genesis starts with eternal God. Genesis then is the book of the origin of the universe.

In Genesis we find the origin of order, information, and complexity. There is order, there are physical laws that function of fixed rules, there is information, and there is life based on cells, that are equivalent to factories and complex irreducible machines. Order , coded information and complexity never arise spontaneously. They are always generated by a prior cause programmed to produce these things simultaneously.

We also find in Genesis the origin of life, the marvels of the reproductive process. The almost infinite complexity programmed into the genetic system of plants and animals are inexplicable apart from special creation by a great, supernatural, powerful intelligence.

Genesis tells us about the origin of man, the most highly organized and complex entity in the universe, the origin of marriage, the remarkable universal and stable institution of marriage as having been ordained by the Creator; the origin of evil. The origin of physical and moral evil in the universe is explained in Genesis as a kind of temporary intrusion into God's perfect world, allowed by God as a concession to the principle of human freedom and responsibility and also to manifest Himself as Redeemer of sinners as well as Creator. In the book of Genesis you find the origin of salvation by grace through God's mercy and a substitute. That's all in Genesis and it starts to show as God is merciful to Adam and Eve and doesn't kill them, even though they deserved to die for their sin. In the book of Genesis that we find the origin of language. How you go from apes to man not just making some physical transition, but developing language, how you go from grunting and making unintelligible noises to human speech. is unexplained by modern science as well. The gulf between the mindless, instinctive chattering of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic communication of man is absolutely and completely unbridgeable by any evolutionary process. You find in Genesis the origin of culture. You find here such things as urbanization, the development of metallurgy, music, agriculture, animal husbandry, writing, education, navigation, textiles and ceramics. All of that starts in the book of Genesis. You find in the book of Genesis the origin of religion. Both the true religion and false religions appear, first of all, in the book of Genesis.

Science knows nothing about origins. No wonder, when pressed hard, the last outcome most atheists come up with , is ignorance. We don't know yet. Science is working on it.

Open questions in biology, biochemistry, and evolution

Open questions in biology, biochemistry, and evolution

When methodological naturalism is applied, the only explanation for the origin of life is abiogenesis, and of biodiversity, Darwins Theory of evolution. Proponents repeat like a mantra : Evolution is a fact. If that were the case, there would exist far more convincing , clear scientific answers to almost all relevant scientific questions and issues. This is far from being the case. Based on scientific papers, quite a different picture arises. Instead of compelling answers, questionmarks and lack of understanding, generalized ignorance in regard of almost all relevant issues, and conceptual problems are the most common. Since the information is widely sparse and scattered amongst thousands of scientific papers, its not so evident that this is the factual state of matter. The general public is duped by effect slogans, that give the false impression of certainty of naturalism. The standard answer, when proponents of naturalism are confronted with this situation, is: "We are working on it". Or: "We don't know yet".

Objection: more possible causal mechanisms exist, maybe even a infinity.
Answer: What can be asserted without evidence, can be discarted without evidence.

Objection:the universe isn't obliged in any to conform to our model of reality. Just look at Einstein's relativity theories. They demonstrate that the universe can confound us. That justifies not become attached to any viewpoint.
Answer: Even if a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) is not fully understood, the possible mechanisms to explain our existence are still the same.

1. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049237X09704124
2. Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 1
3. Design from Fine-Tuning | Reasonable Faith
4. Grand Unified Theory - Wikipedia
5. Creation: Believe It or Not, Part 2


I believe that God was in charge of Creation, but the scriptures describe Creation as old. I prefer the scriptures opinions.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Something 6,000 years old would be old.

OK. But the Garden East of Eden is described as old.
As is Adam and his pal Eve. None of them seem "Zero" years old.
I'll have to recheck to see if the Garden could be about 6000 years old.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
OK. But the Garden East of Eden is described as old.
As is Adam and his pal Eve. None of them seem "Zero" years old.
I'll have to recheck to see if the Garden could be about 6000 years old.

Eden was planted on day 6, so yes about 6000 years old.

You really should check out the Genesis movie tomorrow (if your theater is not sold out). I know you don't believe in Mother Nature, but you really need to let go of Father Time.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Eden was planted on day 6, so yes about 6000 years old.
You really should check out the Genesis movie tomorrow (if your theater is not sold out). I know you don't believe in Mother Nature, but you really need to let go of Father Time.

Sure, but why 6000?
And the graden east of Eden was planted in ......dirt?
How old is dirt?
How old are fruiting trees?
How old is a river?
How old is "bdellium and the onyx stone"?
Is Onyx stone a few days old?
How old is Adam eating from trees? A few days old?


8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

10Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it divided and became four rivers. 11The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. 13The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. 14The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,699
1,957
✟70,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
OK. But the Garden East of Eden is described as old.
As is Adam and his pal Eve. None of them seem "Zero" years old.
I'll have to recheck to see if the Garden could be about 6000 years old.

There are many who have done the checking Bishop Usher style....and present similar biblical dates. The earth is appr. 6K years old.
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,699
1,957
✟70,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Sure, but why 6000?
And the graden east of Eden was planted in ......dirt?
How old is dirt?
How old are fruiting trees?
How old is a river?
How old is "bdellium and the onyx stone"?
Is Onyx stone a few days old?
How old is Adam eating from trees? A few days old?


8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

10Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it divided and became four rivers. 11The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. 13The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. 14The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. 16The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;

I think one needs to understand that the appearance of some type of age was required. As Adam was created as a young man...on day 6 Adam may have looked to be 18 years old....or what ever age he was created at...yet in reality was 1 day old on day 7.

Many use the fossils to show ancient age....but fail to realize they were for the most part deposited during the flood of Noah....which happened 1900-2000 years after the creation.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What so many cannot come to grips with is that the earth was created as a mature planet, complete with all the resources man would ever need including gold, iron, oil and gas. It was created this way because God knew from the first day of creation that one day we would be arguing with environmentalists who thought we were destroying the planet by utilizing the resources the Lord put there for us. The Lord knew it all. He knew there would arise false teachers who would argue against His existence when He created the world in a sequence not compatible with the laws of nature. He knew all this before the first day because he is the all knowing Lord of all.
 
Upvote 0

Queller

I'm where?
May 25, 2012
6,446
681
✟45,092.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Politics
US-Others
What so many cannot come to grips with is that the earth was created as a mature planet, complete with all the resources man would ever need including gold, iron, oil and gas.
The very fact that we have oil is evidence that the earth is older than 6,000 years. Oil is formed when organic remains are covered with sediment and then subjected to heat and pressure over time (there's more to it but that is the basics). If God created the oil in place then He created a false history.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: USincognito
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
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think one needs to understand that the appearance of some type of age was required. As Adam was created as a young man...on day 6 Adam may have looked to be 18 years old....or what ever age he was created at...yet in reality was 1 day old on day 7.

Many use the fossils to show ancient age....but fail to realize they were for the most part deposited during the flood of Noah....which happened 1900-2000 years after the creation.

You've made my point well, there is no physical evidence that Adam
or the earth would be ever have been "zero" in age according to
scientific analysis.

"Flood Geology" is only supported by Ken Ham and the Institute for Creation Research.
Just a few 100 men.

The problem with flood geology is that fossils really do indicate that the geologic
column was not laid down in one event. And scripture is more in support of the
former earth being dissolved with no fossils to survive the remaking of the earth at all.

So flood geology is not scriptural. It's Ken Ham-ural.

geo-column.jpg
 
Upvote 0

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,699
1,957
✟70,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You've made my point well, there is no physical evidence that Adam
or the earth would be ever have been "zero" in age according to
scientific analysis.

"Flood Geology" is only supported by Ken Ham and the Institute for Creation Research.
Just a few 100 men.

The problem with flood geology is that fossils really do indicate that the geologic
column was not laid down in one event. And scripture is more in support of the
former earth being dissolved with no fossils to survive the remaking of the earth at all.

So flood geology is not scriptural. It's Ken Ham-ural.

When I ead oyur post i see you really don't understand flood geology and how the strata were laid down.
That's OK. Most evolutionist don't. They've never really been exposed to the models.
Most Evo's have one of two models in mind. They're what I call the bathtub model or the cement mixer model.

Bathtub model....the belief that The flood of Noah covered the earth like filling up a bathtub...faucet on and the water continues to rise until the faucet is turned off.

Cement mixer...all the sediment caused by the flood of Noah would have churned around the earth like a giant cement mixer and would have caused one homologous layer.

In reality the flood of Noah consisted on many events....not just one event as you seemed to suggest above.
As the waters increased in places it was tidal and later reseeded only to return and recovered a large area depositing sediment. The sea animals would have been captured by the flood first followed by the amphibian and other shore animals as the flood rose. lastly the land animals would have succumbed to the rising flood waters. That somewhat agree's with the picture you presented. Keep in mind what I presented was very simplified.
Then there is the reseeding waters when the flood ended...

Just for the record, where can I find the place on earth your picture represents containing all of those sorts of fossils? To be honest, I don't think it really exist as pictured. I think they took strata from one area and simply inserted it into the picture where they believed it to be.

Do you realize that when the Cambrian fossils are examined it is seen that the major phyla and classes of animals suddenly appear fully developed in the cambrian strata with no ancestral linage leading up to the many different phyla and classes?
Do you realize they have found soft tissue in dino bone fossils that could not have survived for 65 MY's? They've even found soft tissue in other fossils dated older than 65 MY's.
Do you realize they find C14 which has a half life of 5730 years in coal that began forming by old earth time lines 360 MY's ago? The C14 should have been gone a long time ago....

You see, I have no real reason to accept your picture.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
When I ead oyur post i see you really don't understand flood geology and how the strata were laid down.
That's OK. Most evolutionist don't. They've never really been exposed to the models.
Most Evo's have one of two models in mind. They're what I call the bathtub model or the cement mixer model.

Bathtub model....the belief that The flood of Noah covered the earth like filling up a bathtub...faucet on and the water continues to rise until the faucet is turned off.

Cement mixer...all the sediment caused by the flood of Noah would have churned around the earth like a giant cement mixer and would have caused one homologous layer.

In reality the flood of Noah consisted on many events....not just one event as you seemed to suggest above.
As the waters increased in places it was tidal and later reseeded only to return and recovered a large area depositing sediment. The sea animals would have been captured by the flood first followed by the amphibian and other shore animals as the flood rose. lastly the land animals would have succumbed to the rising flood waters. That somewhat agree's with the picture you presented. Keep in mind what I presented was very simplified.
Then there is the reseeding waters when the flood ended...

Just for the record, where can I find the place on earth your picture represents containing all of those sorts of fossils? To be honest, I don't think it really exist as pictured. I think they took strata from one area and simply inserted it into the picture where they believed it to be.

Do you realize that when the Cambrian fossils are examined it is seen that the major phyla and classes of animals suddenly appear fully developed in the cambrian strata with no ancestral linage leading up to the many different phyla and classes?
Do you realize they have found soft tissue in dino bone fossils that could not have survived for 65 MY's? They've even found soft tissue in other fossils dated older than 65 MY's.
Do you realize they find C14 which has a half life of 5730 years in coal that began forming by old earth time lines 360 MY's ago? The C14 should have been gone a long time ago....

You see, I have no real reason to accept your picture.


You are buying the stories and the mis-stories at the same time.
"Do you realize that when the Cambrian fossils are examined it is seen that the major phyla and classes of animals suddenly appear fully developed in the cambrian strata with no ancestral linage leading up to the many different phyla and classes?"

This question says that you buy into the layering concept over time already.
My question is why are there no rabbits in "Pre-Cambrian " layers?

185
fat-bunny1.jpeg




As to how long soft tissue can exist,
I don't have the time to double
check your soft-tissue experiments.
Who really has the time needed to
conduct such tests to confirm how
long bones remain pliable and soft?
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you realize they find C14 which has a half life of 5730 years in coal that began forming by old earth time lines 360 MY's ago? The C14 should have been gone a long time ago....

Coal only takes a few hours to form in ovens from organic materials.
Or with less heat and more time, as long as you choose.
I am not startled by info I already can understand.
 
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
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What so many cannot come to grips with is that the earth was created as a mature planet, complete with all the resources man would ever need including gold, iron, oil and gas. It was created this way because God knew from the first day of creation that one day we would be arguing with environmentalists who thought we were destroying the planet by utilizing the resources the Lord put there for us. The Lord knew it all. He knew there would arise false teachers who would argue against His existence when He created the world in a sequence not compatible with the laws of nature. He knew all this before the first day because he is the all knowing Lord of all.

Perhaps that is correct. But there is no reason to argue for a "young" earth when scripture clearly describes the hills as ancient and everlasting.

The Blessings of the Twelve Tribes
…14 And with the choice yield of the sun, And with the choice produce of the months. 15"And with the best things of the ancient mountains,And with the choice things of the everlasting hills,

Original Word: עוֹלָם
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: olam
"everlasting" ---> ages (1), all successive (1), always (1), ancient (13), ancient times (3), continual (1), days of old (1), eternal (2), eternity (3), ever (10), Everlasting (2), everlasting (110), forever (136), forever and ever (1), forever* (70), forevermore* (1), lasting (1), long (2), long ago (3), long past (1), long time (3), never* (17), old (11), permanent (10), permanently (1), perpetual (29), perpetually (1).




Scripture describes the earth as very old so stop giving scripture a hard time
with an Australian accent.


img.jpg
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Just for the record, where can I find the place on earth your picture represents containing all of those sorts of fossils? To be honest, I don't think it really exist as pictured. I think they took strata from one area and simply inserted it into the picture where they believed it to be.

For the record....where is your corrected geologic column?
Searching for "Steve Austin" I can't find his improved diagram of the rock layers.
I find TONS of pictures of his face, but no improved diagrams.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The very fact that we have oil is evidence that the earth is older than 6,000 years. Oil is formed when organic remains are covered with sediment and then subjected to heat and pressure over time (there's more to it but that is the basics). If God created the oil in place then He created a false history.
One problem with that is the noted lack of organic remains in the deserts of Africa, where oil is plentiful. Everything In genesis points to a mature creation; from trees bearing fruit to an adult man. Nothing evolved. Nothing grew from seed. All were brought about in their maturity.
 
Upvote 0

Queller

I'm where?
May 25, 2012
6,446
681
✟45,092.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
Politics
US-Others
One problem with that is the noted lack of organic remains in the deserts of Africa, where oil is plentiful. Everything In genesis points to a mature creation; from trees bearing fruit to an adult man. Nothing evolved. Nothing grew from seed. All were brought about in their maturity.
:doh:The oil is what's left of the organic remains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USincognito
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

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,699
1,957
✟70,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You are buying the stories and the mis-stories at the same time.
"Do you realize that when the Cambrian fossils are examined it is seen that the major phyla and classes of animals suddenly appear fully developed in the cambrian strata with no ancestral linage leading up to the many different phyla and classes?"

This question says that you buy into the layering concept over time already.
My question is why are there no rabbits in "Pre-Cambrian " layers?




As to how long soft tissue can exist,
I don't have the time to double
check your soft-tissue experiments.
Who really has the time needed to
conduct such tests to confirm how
long bones remain pliable and soft?

Huh???
 
Upvote 0