Michael Snow
Well-Known Member
Don't add your words to God's word. Nothing about how long ago. Read the first three verses (in context) of Genesis In The Beginning
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
....what is really important is that God created over 6 days a few thousand years ago.
As a creationist I have read Genesis many times and I can tell you unequivocally that no section of scripture in either the Old or New Testament mentions millions of years or suggests millions of years, certainly not Genesis 1.Don't add your words to God's word. Nothing about how long ago. Read the first three verses (in context) of Genesis In The Beginning
The only people claiming millions of years are proponents of evolution.
And yet, if your God did indeed create the world in six days some 6,000 years ago, the question remains - why did he give it the appearance of it being 4.5 billion years old in a universe seemingly 13.5 billion years old? Certainly an odd choice.Do not add your words to God's word claiming million of years. The only people claiming millions of years are proponents of evolution. A Godless satanic theory to remove God as creator and install nature as its own god, its own driving force for creating and shaping the world
And yet … the question remains
You assume you know what I mean by 'a few thousand' but you don't. 6000 years ago is what James Ussher, a Church of Ireland Archbishop came up with. I don't follow people who make claims to know the date of creation. (October 22, 4004 BC.)And yet, if your God did indeed create the world in six days some 6,000 years ago, the question remains - why did he give it the appearance of it being 4.5 billion years old in a universe seemingly 13.5 billion years old? Certainly an odd choice.
God tells us plainly in his word how he created.
Because the scriptures has power, power to change lives, power to touch the heart, soul and spirit. Not just because it tells us it does, but because I know it does. I went from being an agnostic to a Christian by the power of scripture. I went from a 'nominal' evolution believer to a creationist. I had probably only been to a church 5 times my entire life so it wasn't church and it wasn't a preacher, but scripture that reached me.why do you assume the bible is god’s word?
rather than just another text
Because the scriptures has power, power to change lives
Buddhism does not claim to divide between soul and spirit. It does not believe there is an eternal, unchanging soul at all.As does other scripture, for example Buddhism
So is Christianity.
Buddhism … does not believe there is an eternal, unchanging soul at all.
The end of Christianity is not heaven, heaven is but a place of waiting for the faithful.Christianity leads to heaven
The end of Christianity is the new world. Where God and the faithful will live.
This world is to end by fire.
Hi JSRG, I don't think we've met before. Nice to meet you!This may be a tangent, but I still wish to note it.
It is not really accurate to say Galileo "pointed out" that the Earth moved around the sun. That expression makes it sound as if this was obvious or at least provable and he was just demonstrating it. It wasn't. There was evidence for it, and there was evidence against it at the time. At most someone could say Galileo had done the best job arguing for it, but he hadn't proven it. It was only later on that more evidence was gathered which managed to more fully prove what Galileo was unable to. At the time, and with the evidence available, there were very valid reasons to be skeptical of Galileo's ideas... and other scientists were. Galileo was in the minority scientifically at the time, because the scientific information available at the time hadn't proven his claims yet. Indeed, it should be noted that modern scientific information still hasn't proven his claims, because Galileo claimed that the Sun did not move and everything went around it--which is rejected by modern scientists and heliocentrists. Galileo might have been right about the specific claim of Earth going around the Sun, but his larger claim of the Sun being immobile is not considered true even today.
As for the condemnation of Galileo itself, it should be noted that the claim that the Earth moves around the sun was not by itself what he was specifically condemned for. The 1633 decree against him condemns the claim that the Earth is mobile and that the Sun is immobile as one doctrine, as shown here:
While this page's argument is more strictly aimed at fringe Catholics who try to claim that the church infallibly declared heliocentrism to be a heresy, it nevertheless is of use to us here as it points out that what was condemned was the combined claim that the Sun was immobile and the Earth mobile:
To the extent that it specifically addresses a doctrinal point, the 1633 decree strictly addresses Copernicanism as a unity. Throughout, the decree addresses a singular doctrine/opinion which has two facets, an immobile sun at the center of the universe and a mobile earth:
“the false doctrine [NB: singular] taught by some that the Sun is the center of the world and immovable and that the Earth moves, and also with a diurnal motion”
“the false opinion [NB: singular] of the motion of the Earth and the stability of the Sun”
“the doctrine [NB: singular] of the motion of the Earth and the stability of the Sun is contrary to the Holy Scriptures and therefore cannot be defended or held.”
“the doctrine [NB: singular]—which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures—that the Sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the Earth moves and is not the center of the world”
Again, what the 1633 decree actually addresses is a singular doctrine/opinion which includes two points—notice that they are connected with the conjunction “and”, not “or” —viz., that that the sun is the immovable center of the universe and that the earth moves and is not the center of the universe.
Now, had the science proved that the Sun was in fact immobile and the Earth (and everything else) went around it, then the decree could be considered wrong. But the claim by modern science is instead that the Sun and Earth are both mobile. Therefore, what is regarded as the truth nowadays was not what was condemned against Galileo.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?