is creating with age deceptive?

[Assyrian]

i see by this response of yours that you practice what Jesus taught you about showing brotherly kindness, love to others, being a peacemaker and other sermon on the mount tidbits.

This from archaeologist

Rats! There goes another irony meter!

 

[juvenissun]

Someone may help me to solve this problem:

We see the sunlight after a few (eight?) minutes after the photon left the sun. The 8 minutes is the time perceived by us. But for the photon, it travels at the speed of light, how long does it take to reach the earth? This is the time perceived by the photon.

Would the time be nearly instant?

If so, how much time is needed for the light to reach the earth from xxx million light-years away if the time is measured "on the light"? Would that also be instant?

Let me illustrate it with a more obvious example:

Suppose Gluadys takes a space ship for a trip to another star system with a 0.95 warp speed. So when she come back to earth, she experience a time lapse, say, one year. But everyone else on earth aged 50 years.

So, 50 years for us = 1 year for Gluadys;
Similarly, 1 million light-year time for us = 0.0001 (?) year for the light

Does that mean if God creates the star 1 million light year away, and we on earth could see the star almost instantly?

Oh, Nevermind. I know the answer now.

 

[theIdi0t]

why should i be reported. all i said was 'depends on how you look at it' which is quite true. and non-maligning.

yes but if you read 1 john you will see that being saved doesn't allow you to change God's word, declare it allegorical or metaphorical and so on, when you want it to be.

when one becomes saved, they become the servants of God not His master thus the servant is not at liberty to change the message, or style because it does not suit his perspective and desires or to stop looking foolish.

You don't get it do you? Why not pull the plank out of your own eye, before you try to pick the saw dust out of the eyes of others? Who gives you the authority to decide that the story is literal? You think you are so wise, that you assume that the literal reading is what benefits the spirit, but as a blind man you do not see the spiritual bread, you pray for the worldly bread instead.

I don't pursue secular thinking. You pursue it when you bring secular thinking into the word, by seeking science in the word, that is the one who has comprised and corrupted scripture, but don't accuse me of your brethren's black stains.

 

[archaeologist]

the idiot:

Who gives you the authority to decide that the story is literal

God. 2 peter 1:21, titus 1:1-3 etc.

You think you are so wise, that you assume that the literal reading is what benefits the spirit, but as a blind man you do not see the spiritual bread, you pray for the worldly bread instead.

that made no sense whatsoever. God gives wisdom to those that ask. nice to see you know all about me when you have never met me.

i am reminded of what God said to Job, in chapter 38:1-4--

1Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

2Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

bold is mine as it has a point-- for the word 'thou' put in the word 'you' meaning theistic evolutionists & 'science' as either word would fit this situation.

science and scientists were not there in the beginning, so where do they get the authority to say what took place in the beginning? it isn't from God.

I don't pursue secular thinking. You pursue it when you bring secular thinking into the word, by seeking science in the word, that is the one who has comprised and corrupted scripture, but don't accuse me of your brethren's black stains.

if you believe in evolution then you are pursuing secular thinking. evolution is not of God.

juvenissun:

Oh, Nevermind. I know the answer now

your illustration is all theory and canot be verifiable. the problem that i see is how you can say that there are two time systems governing humans. when does warp time suspend human time? when are the astronauts freed from human time that governs their lives?

these may seem like dumb questions to you, but everyone likes to focus on the theoretical conclusions and not deal with the reality.

assyrian:

This from archaeologist

please. it is a sarcatic observation. you say you are christians yet you all are the first to insult and ignore Christ's teaching on how to treat others. i had a friend of mine tell me after she read someof the responses that you guys were very rude.

so you say you believe in Christ but it seems His teachings on behavior are subject to your A & M theology. you pick and choose what yu want to believe and forget the rest.

From what I see, we TE's tend to preach and teach the full gospel of Christ and God's grace. We don't add anything to it. You creationists are the one adding the requirement of believing in a particular interpretation of Genesis

we haven't added anythng to the text nor changed its meaning nor claimed it doesn't say what it says. TE= theistic evolution--- doesn't your name give you any clue what has been added to your theology? not one verse throughout the Bible claims God used a process other than His literal work to create.

we haven't added a thing, nor do we claim allegorical or metaphorical where it does not apply or is convenient to support a desire to believe something that is not of God but includes a field one has interest in studying.

nor do we adopt or accept secular models to add to the scripture reference. i have asked for proof that evolution was form God and yet none of you have furnished anythng. again i ask post the verses which declare God created evolution and used it in His creative work.

 

[archaeologist]

let's take this in another direction then since you cannot answer the previous post.

is adding evolution to genesis 1 deceptive?

 

[Assyrian]

let's take this in another direction then since you cannot answer the previous post.

is adding evolution to genesis 1 deceptive?

We don't.

 

[shernren]

let's take this in another direction then since you cannot answer the previous post.

is adding evolution to genesis 1 deceptive?

God used evolution.

We figured that out.

The fact that God used evolution really isn't "deceptive" in any sense of the word I know.

I don't get your question.

 

[Deamiter]

let's take this in another direction then since you cannot answer the previous post.

is adding evolution to genesis 1 deceptive?

Indeed, as others have said, nobody has ever tried to "add" evolution to Genesis 1. Just as you have interpreted statements like "the sun stopped in the sky" and "the sun rises and sets" as figurative because of prior knowledge of the universe, we have taken the clear poetic form of Genesis 1 to show that it was never meant as a purely historical account and used our knowledge of the universe to determine that since it is not factually accurate (just as the phrases cited above) the truths imparted must be non-factual in nature.

If anybody is adding to Genesis, you're adding an ultra-factual meaning that was never intended and is, in fact, false.

 

[archaeologist]

We don't.

yes you do.

God used evolution.

please quote the scripture, in context, where it states that He did.

The fact that God used evolution really isn't "deceptive" in any sense of the word I know

since evolution does not exist, how could He use it?

we have taken the clear poetic form of Genesis 1 to show that it was never meant as a purely historical account and used our knowledge of the universe to determine that since it is not factually accurate

'we have' & 'our knowledge' nothing here that is scriptural or God ordained.

in other words you have decided based upon your limited understanding that God lied and did it secular science's way?

how does you knowledge of the universe determine what God did, when no one was present when God did it?

most of what your knowledge is is just inferrences based upon tools and equipment designed by fallible man, whose calibrations cannot even be verified and are based upon assumptions, based in the ideal and not reality.

did you ever stop to think that what some of secular science has discovered was the way God designed things to work AFTER He created everything and was not what governed is Work?

If anybody is adding to Genesis, you're adding an ultra-factual meaning that was never intended and is, in fact, false.

so you are calling all the Bible passages which speak on creation false? i have added nothing but stayed with what scripture says.

darwin took a pre-existing theory, that has no roots in God, added in some inferrences and conclusions he could never prove, then some people decided to add God to the picture, to look spiritual, then break all the rules of translation, do some interpretational gymnastics that would break any gymnist, and then claim they know what God did.

sorry but the only people adding to scripture are those who create alternatives to it.

 

[gluadys]

yes you do.

No, we don't.

please quote the scripture, in context, where it states that He did.

Since we don't add evolution to scripture, we don't expect to find a reference to evolution in scripture.

since evolution does not exist, how could He use it?

You are mistaken. Evolution does exist.

how does you knowledge of the universe determine what God did, when no one was present when God did it?

Evolution is not a theory about the beginning of the universe. We don't need to know about the beginning of the universe to study evolution. It is happening today, and as far as we can determine, has been happening as long as there have been populations of living organisms on earth.

did you ever stop to think that what some of secular science has discovered was the way God designed things to work AFTER He created everything and was not what governed is Work?

Yes, and we would see evolution as one of those things God designed to work in populations of living organisms after early life was created.

so you are calling all the Bible passages which speak on creation false? i have added nothing but stayed with what scripture says.

No, just saying that you have an incorrect understanding of the Biblical passages. Being too literal is just as much an error as being overly allegorical.

 

[archaeologist]

God has allowed you freedom of choice, i have stated what He wanted me to state, the choice is up to you. believe and follow Him or believe and follow evil.

you can't have it both ways, evolution is not of God or there would be scripture to support it. there isn't.

 

[archaeologist]

i think these verses answer the thread's question:

7 Let the wicked forsake his way
and the evil man his thoughts.
Let him turn to the LORD, and he will have mercy on him,
and to our God, for he will freely pardon.

8 "For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,"
declares the LORD. 9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts

 

[archaeologist]

i would like to hear some concise, credible points as to why God creating as He did in genesis (6 24 hour days) would be considered deception if things looked like they had age.

 

[ExpatChristian]

i would like to hear some concise, credible points as to why God creating as He did in genesis (6 24 hour days) would be considered deception if things looked like they had age.

Can you re-write this. It is not clear.

 

[busterdog]

i would like to hear some concise, credible points as to why God creating as He did in genesis (6 24 hour days) would be considered deception if things looked like they had age.

Out of six billion people, would it make any sense to judge "deception" by what some people think about how things appear? God deceiving some people would thus be required, since someone will always be deceived.

And if God is always "deceiving" someone, should we not, like the disciples, ask, "Is it I Lord?" rather than trying to prove to a certain interpretation of scripture by this baseless use of science?

Does God only design his creation to satisfy scientists of a particular age and their evaluation of what might seem deceptive?

There is no credible argument based upon "deception."

The only argument is that some people of this age think the earth is of a certain age and that, therefore, the BIble cannot be read a certain way. And of course, I disagree greatly with that view.

 

[archaeologist]

Out of six billion people, would it make any sense to judge "deception" by what some people think about how things appear? God deceiving some people would thus be required, since someone will always be deceived.

why only 6 billion? there were a lot more thanthat on this earth.

1. for God to be declared a deceiver, He would have to be demoted to equality with the devil and that isn't so.

2. for God to be a deceiver His word would have to say something it doesn't and try to convince people that the false words were true

3. for God to be a deceiver, one would have to understand how God did things, His intent, purpose and so on then compare that with the reality as one knew it provided that the reality as one knows it is perfect and without sin.

And if God is always "deceiving" someone, should we not, like the disciples, ask, "Is it I Lord?" rather than trying to prove to a certain interpretation of scripture by this baseless use of science?

in examining God's word maybe those who doubt it should remind themselves...'they who are without sin cast the first stone...'

maybe then they will realize thatsecular science is fullof sin andis not following God and their eyes will be opened to God's reality.

There is no credible argument based upon "deception

depends. when one discounts and omits the working of the evil one then that may be the case but...

The only argument is that some people of this age think the earth is of a certain age and that, therefore, the BIble cannot be read a certain way. And of course, I disagree greatly with that view

all we have are the words, 'in the beginning...' both OEC and YEC make mistakes when tryng to determine how old the earth is. science doesn't and can't know, nor can we guess because we do not know.

 

[busterdog]

why only 6 billion? there were a lot more thanthat on this earth.

1. for God to be declared a deceiver, He would have to be demoted to equality with the devil and that isn't so.

2. for God to be a deceiver His word would have to say something it doesn't and try to convince people that the false words were true

3. for God to be a deceiver, one would have to understand how God did things, His intent, purpose and so on then compare that with the reality as one knew it provided that the reality as one knows it is perfect and without sin.

I think we agree about this term "deception". My argument is that this is just not a workable choice of terms in the first place. God apparently does "hide" some things from the wise and reveals it to babes.

in examining God's word maybe those who doubt it should remind themselves...'they who are without sin cast the first stone...'

Interesting come back.

maybe then they will realize thatsecular science is fullof sin andis not following God and their eyes will be opened to God's reality.

depends. when one discounts and omits the working of the evil one then that may be the case but...

OK. Not that we have an easy time defining it, and certainly "deception" doesn't prove to any rule for hermeneutics on the basis of how things appear. It more readily supports the need for revealed truth from God in His WOrd..

all we have are the words, 'in the beginning...' both OEC and YEC make mistakes when tryng to determine how old the earth is. science doesn't and can't know, nor can we guess because we do not know.

Well, the Bishop Ussher thing is much better approximation than any other. And six days is just what it says.

 

[archaeologist]

My argument is that this is just not a workable choice of terms in the first place. God apparently does "hide" some things from the wise and reveals it to babes.

i can agree with you here but some people think it is deceiving for God to make instant maturity instead of starting at the very beginning and let everything grow up like we see today.

Interesting come back

well thank God then as that is the first time i have used that verse in defense of God's word and i wouldn't have thought of it on my own.

It more readily supports the need for revealed truth from God in His WOrd..

for me i would say more applicaation of what God has already said in His word will result in clearer vision on these matters.

Well, the Bishop Ussher thing is much better approximation than any other. And six days is just what it says.

bishop ussher is someone who i disagree with as he was missing a lot of data and information in his work. he admited to leaving out certain anomalies like JOshua's long day and other such events which to me undermines his credibility right there.

plus basing everything on geneologies seems to be basing conclusions on a very limited resource. i would suggest maybe 10,000 years myself due to the evidence that we do have but still that leaves out how much time in the garden did adam and eve spend before the fall and other such events.

to be safe, i would stick with 'in the beginning' when talking about age.

 

[busterdog]

plus basing everything on geneologies seems to be basing conclusions on a very limited resource. i would suggest maybe 10,000 years myself due to the evidence that we do have but still that leaves out how much time in the garden did adam and eve spend before the fall and other such events.

to be safe, i would stick with 'in the beginning' when talking about age.

sounds reasonable.

 

[Atlantians]

Y.E.C.'ers claim that God created with age, in your mind would that be deceptive or practical? why?

for the record i feel that it would be practical but let's hear what others have to say.

You don't create a car to eventually grow into a car, when you create a car, it is a car.

So is making a car completely, deceptive?

Thus making the universe with what we see as age could simply be how God intended the universe to start as.

So it isn't age, it is simply "finished".


I am not a Y.E.C. !!!!!

Just heard this idea against YEC before, and thought this was a major hole.