Let's talk about man

[JonMiller]

Let us forget your overwhelming IF statement for a moment. What are you referring to when you suggest that "God has changed stuff for current obersvations so much?"

Our scientific observations definitely say that there wasn't a common ancestor of all humans 7000 years ago and that the world is only 7000 years old.

Obviously if Genesis is a literal account, then God must have accelerated things, or changed things, or something. It is like looking at a blackhole, we can (sort of, theoretically) look to near the event horizon, but that is where our scientific/physical understand breaks down. And we can't explain what is going on past that.. our theories no longer work.

JM

 

[sentipente]

Our scientific observations definitely say that there wasn't a common ancestor of all humans 7000 years ago and that the world is only 7000 years old.

Where does the Bible mention 7,000 years? Why must we always assume that true=literal?

 

[sentipente]

More importantly, if man had no immune system before the fall why would God suddenly create one for him?

 

[JonMiller]

Why must we always assume that true=literal?

I personally don't.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

I am not saying that man had an immune system before the fall, or that man didn't have an immune system before the fall.

I personally don't think it is an answerable question. You could assume the answer, and come up with other conclusions from that, but that your assumptions for those conclusions would be shaky.

JM

 

[sentipente]

I personally don't.

JM

Good. So, why the reference to 7,000 years? The fact is that man must have been made with an immune system in place or he came out of sin with a body that was better than what he had before sin.

 

[sentipente]

I am not saying that man had an immune system before the fall, or that man didn't have an immune system before the fall.

I personally don't think it is an answerable question. You could assume the answer, and come up with other conclusions from that, but that your assumptions for those conclusions would be shaky.

JM

You don't speak like a scientist. You speak like one trying to protect religious dogma.

 

[mva1985]

If you examine the genealogies listed in the Bible you can come up with an approximate young age for the earth.

 

[sentipente]

If you examine the genealogies listed in the Bible you can come up with an approximate young age for the earth.

Don't follow Bishop Ussher in that. No one knows how long man spent in paradise before the fall.

 

[StormyOne]

I'm dying to know YOUR take on this Stormy--so please--do tell.

Sorry, I can't tell if you are being sincere or sarcastic.... so I'll pass because I think your request is not sincere... have a good day...

 

[JonMiller]

You don't speak like a scientist. You speak like one trying to protect religious dogma.

I do speak like a scientist.

I can tell you what scientific evidence states. I can tell you that scientific evidence does not include the possibility of an active God. Therefore, if there is an active God, then the scientific evidence is meaningless at any time that God acts.

I have a freind who has a hard time beleiving in an active God because of this. He has a hard time picturing a God who does miracles not messing up our physics experiments and the like... and since our physics (And other) experiments work, he doesn't think that God is active.

For example, if God changed the up quarks in my target to +2 charge instead of +2/3 during the scattering, and then changed them back to +2/3 after the bound state ended, my experiment would give results that I would interpret to give a certain value... but that would be based upon the up quark always being +2/3 and would be wrong. Similarly, if God changed how the physical laws worked on a grand scale 7000 or so years ago, I couldn't even construct that such an event happened 7000 or so years ago, much less deduce what went on before such an event.

I am not saying that this is what happened, but this could be what happened.

JM

 

[sentipente]

Why are you changing the subject? This is not a discussion about the existence of God.

 

[mva1985]

Don't follow Bishop Ussher in that. No one knows how long man spent in paradise before the fall.

The ages of the patriarchs are listed in the Bible. I think for the most part God likes to keep most things simple.

 

[sentipente]

The ages of the patriarchs are listed in the Bible. I think for the most part God likes to keep most things simple.

What does keeping things simple have to do with this. And, what do you mean by simple? Do you think the human body is simple?

 

[mva1985]

Don't follow Bishop Ussher in that. No one knows how long man spent in paradise before the fall.

Also taken from the White Estate website:
Did Ellen White believe the earth to be about 6,000 years old?
Ellen White rejected the idea that "the world has existed for tens of thousands of years." She accepted the Biblical record that the creation days were seven literal 24-hour periods, believing that the world "is now only about six thousand years old" (The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, p. 87.) While Ellen White stated that she was shown in vision that creation week consisted of seven literal days (ibid., p. 85), she did not claim to have received any special revelation regarding the specific age of the earth.

 

[mva1985]

What does keeping things simple have to do with this. And, what do you mean by simple? Do you think the human body is simple?

I do believe in the simplicity of design. As you can see that the design of certain creatures is repeated throughout creation.

Why mess with a good thing.

 

[JonMiller]

Why are you changing the subject? This is not a discussion about the existence of God.

The question of an active God is what this is essentially about. An active God means the earth could (but doesn't have to) be 7000 years old. If God isn't active, then the earth is 4.5 billion (or whatever, it isn't my field) years old.

Note, I am not saying that Adam and Eve lived 7000 years ago. I am saying that, assuming an active God, they could. And if they did, we don't have any scientific evidence we can use to detemrine anything about them. (because science says that they didn't exist 7000 years ago)

JM

 

[sentipente]

I do believe in the simplicity of design. As you can see that the design of certain creatures is repeated throughout creation.

Why mess with a good thing.

What are you talking about? Simplicity or repetition?

 

[sentipente]

JM, you have gone off around a mulberry bush that has no bearing on this one. The concept of an active God is only clear in your mind. I am active in my child's life but I don't micro-manage everything that happens to him. I allow him to develop because the rules of nature are in place to govern his development. We are still left with the question from the OP.

 

[JonMiller]

It is unanswerable though. If you beleive in an active God. If you don't, or beleive that He doesn't act, then the answer is easy and I already posted it.

JM