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.
Right.Occam's razor is not an absolute rule and does not guarantee that the simplest explanation is always the correct one. Scientific inquiry often involves balancing simplicity with other factors, such as explanatory power, predictive ability, and empirical evidence. Scientists must consider multiple criteria and evaluate the overall coherence and fit of an explanation to the available evidence.
Therefore, while Occam's razor is commonly employed in scientific reasoning, it is not solely based on science itself, but rather it reflects a broader philosophical and logical principle that is widely applied in various fields of inquiry, including science.
My basic approach is to use the Scientific method to show that the Bible is true and accurate. Of course, not everything can be proven true. We accept some things by faith. There is nothing in the Bible that can be shown not to be true when properly understood. Science can help us in our translation and interpretation of the Bible.
You do not think the earth has circled the sun 4.5 billion times?I think he did.
Entering into God’s rest is referring to resting from our toils and struggles, basically it’s a reference to entering into heaven. I would also point out that the verses that refer to God’s rest at creation refer to His rest in the past tense not the present tense as if He is still resting.The point is not whether or not God could create the earth to look thousands, millions or billions of years old. The question is whether or not he did. He could also have perhaps covered the earth with water, and then a year later evaporated it all into space. The question is whether he did. Looking for a natural cause of existence or other Biblical miracles (like the many theories about the plagues of Egypt) is folly if they are truly supernatural miracles.
However; logic would tell you that if you did something miraculous, why would you want to remove, alter or otherwise obscure the evidence to deliberately confuse your creation. Therefore, the focus on proving the Bible is not the determination of what natural phenomena caused the miracle, but what evidence was left behind.
To understand the evidence, you need to understand the Bible, and the Bible leaves many clues about things that aren't stated directly. Is a creative day 24 hours long? Was the seventh day of rest 24 hours long?
Genesis 2:2,3 - "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."
If it was a single day, then why do we read in Psalms 95:11 regarding the generation of the Israelites that left Egypt.
"So I declared on oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”
This is over 2500 years after the time that God rested. If this rest was still happening then the day of rest had not ended yet. You may argue that the "rest" in this verse is different from Genesis, but this is elaborated on in most of Hebrews 4 (after quoting Psalms in chapter 3). The entire chapter is a good read on the subject, but here's a snippet from verse 9-11:
"There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience."
Now we are 4000+ years from creation. If God's "day" of rest is over 4000 years long, then it is logical to conclude that the "days" of creation are longer than 24 hours, as is the "day" that God made the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 2:4)
The creation account in Genesis isn’t a parable, it’s a record of a miraculous event. We have no way of knowing how many times the earth has circled the sun.You do not think the earth has circled the sun 4.5 billion times?
We are told that God "declares the end from the beginning, and ancient times from what is still to come." Isaiah 46:10. Our perspective is different. We are told time is relative and based on our viewpoint. I know at 71 looking back is a lot different than life was at 7 looking forward.
Most everything is an object lesson with something to be learned from it.
A parable is a type of storytelling used to convey moral or spiritual lessons or to illustrate a specific point. While parables may contain elements that are inspired by real-life situations or observations, they are generally not intended to be understood as literal or historically accurate accounts. Instead, parables use fictional or hypothetical scenarios to communicate deeper truths or teachings.
My doctors tell me I am a complicated and complex person.Do you put any weight on Occam's Razor?
What we know is based on Radiometric & Zircon Dating, which has to be calibrated. I can understand why people have a problem with that. But they are not able to come up with anything any better. We do deal with probability and possibility.We have no way of knowing how many times the earth has circled the sun.
I don't know. What do the scientists say?You do not think the earth has circled the sun 4.5 billion times?
I weigh everything. See A Denomination-Free, Disciplined, Logical, and Probabilistic Approach to Biblical HermeneuticsMy doctors tell me I am a complicated and complex person.
The use of probability and probabilistic statements is fundamental to fields such as statistics, physics, biology, and many other scientific disciplines. It allows scientists to quantify uncertainty, make predictions based on available data, and evaluate the strength of evidence.
Ok but we don’t know what the earth was subjected to during the creation process. So it’s still plausible that their data is incorrect. They’re limited to assuming that certain conditions either remained constant or changing conditions remained changing at a constant rate. There’s a ton of speculation that goes into those predictions and they’re hypothetical in the sense that they have to base those predictions on if X, Y, and Z remained constant then we can conclude that the earth is X amount of years old. If X, Y, or Z did not remain constant then it can throwWhat we know is based on Radiometric & Zircon Dating, which has to be calibrated. I can understand why people have a problem with that. But they are not able to come up with anything any better. We do deal with probability and possibility.
The length of the day is more complicated because the Earth is slowing down in direct proportion to the moon moving away from the earth. There is also a wobble effect when the Earth comes close enough to another planet to be affected by its gravity.
When I was a child I had a dream where God showed me the universe is expanding. The age of the universe is based on the speed of light and how far that light has traveled. They use the same math they use for GPS today.Ok but we don’t know what the earth was subjected to during the creation process.
The half-life of facts is around 50 years. Something new comes along to give us a better understanding.So it’s still plausible that their data is incorrect.
But the distance we can see is much farther than how old they predict the universe is. They predict the universe is 13 billion years old but we can see 46 billion light years away.When I was a child I had a dream where God showed me the universe is expanding. The age of the universe is based on the speed of light and how far that light has traveled. They use the same math they use for GPS today.
The people who do not accept a 14 billion year old universe still say that God must have created the Universe with an appearance of age.
According to our current understanding of the universe, the expansion of space itself can cause objects to move away from each other at speeds greater than the speed of light. This phenomenon is known as the expansion of the universe.But the distance we can see is much farther than how old they predict the universe is. They predict the universe is 13 billion years old but we can see 46 billion light years away.
Right. In fact, 1 second after the big bang, the universe expanded to be about 50 light-years in size.According to our current understanding of the universe, the expansion of space itself can cause objects to move away from each other at speeds greater than the speed of light. This phenomenon is known as the expansion of the universe.
It's important to note that this expansion does not violate the fundamental principle of special relativity, which states that no object with mass can travel through space faster than the speed of light. However, the expansion of space is a different concept. It refers to the stretching of the fabric of space itself, causing galaxies and other cosmic structures to move away from each other.
Max Planck divides that first second into one ten-million-trillion-trillion-trillioneths of a second. During the Planck era, the universe was in an extremely hot and dense state, where the four fundamental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces) were believed to be unified.Right. In fact, 1 second after the big bang, the universe expanded to be about 50 light-years in size.
There is a difference between science and science fiction. My son is a computer engineer and he is very good at creating a formula to take something complex and make it easy to understand.There’s a ton of speculation that goes into those predictions and they’re hypothetical in the sense that they have to base those predictions
Vs 1 is a summary of all of it.Genesis 1:1 says the heavens and the earth. Some people think that the creative days began on verse 2 and others on verse 1. If it is verse 1, then the rocks on earth cannot be older than the heavens. If it is verse 2, the earth could be much older than the life on it. Either way it is reasonable to conclude that the earth's creation included the rocks on it.
They have to be biologically as tall as an adult.Of course they are not embryonic, but they don't have to be the equivalent of a biological 24 year old either.
It could be a "Blue Lagoon" age scenario meaning 14-16. People are attracted sexually to potential partners much earlier than 24, and can have children.
Not true. They had language, they had the ability to relate as husband and wife, they could worship God etc.Regardless of what age Adam and Eve looked, they, for all intents and purposes, their experience was no more than an infant
Not true. Not only are the capable but you seem them in argument with Satan himself in Gen 3., and their mental development is not demonstrated in the narrative to be anything beyond juvenile.
More than enough time ... 130 years.Seth was born when they were at a documented age of 130, so they had definitely enough time to mature before having children.
models are just that... models and faulty assumptions used for the baseline is the old "garbage-in, garbage-out" problem so well defined and proven in real life,It's based on mathematical modeling, and known scientific principles. The modeling is very accurate, but what is not clear is the beginning state of most of these processes.
As tonychanyt demonstrated, they can plot a course to Mars remotely using known mathematics. They can work backwards with similar models, but eventually you get to a singularity state
real science is based on the ability to reproduce something and to test it where it can be reproduced in any location on planet Earth.There is a difference between science and science fiction. My son is a computer engineer and he is very good at creating a formula to take something complex and make it easy to understand.
Science relies on rigorous methodology, peer review, and evidence-based reasoning to make predictions and advance our understanding of the natural world. Scientific predictions are based on empirical data, mathematical models, and the best available evidence at a given time. While scientific predictions may not always be perfect, the scientific process allows for continual refinement and improvement based on new data and discoveries.
Ok but my point was that a young earth is still plausible.There is a difference between science and science fiction. My son is a computer engineer and he is very good at creating a formula to take something complex and make it easy to understand.
Science relies on rigorous methodology, peer review, and evidence-based reasoning to make predictions and advance our understanding of the natural world. Scientific predictions are based on empirical data, mathematical models, and the best available evidence at a given time. While scientific predictions may not always be perfect, the scientific process allows for continual refinement and improvement based on new data and discoveries.
No one knows..... But some can know how old it is not.How old is the earth?
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?