My Layer Challenge

[AV1611VET]

They sent probes to the moon to test all sorts of things prior to manned missions.

Ya -- and some kids "tested" my house by sending a drone over it.

 

[River Jordan]

Ya -- and some kids "tested" my house by sending a drone over it.

You really think that's equivalent to NASA sending probes to the moon? Really?

 

[AV1611VET]

You really think that's equivalent to NASA sending probes to the moon? Really?

Let me get this straight.

Some scientists think the layer of moondust is deep.

So they send satellites to look down at it.

They find out that the layer of moondust is not deep.

So they claim they tested the layer?

That's like saying some scientists believe Saturn didn't have any rings, so they build a telescope and find out Saturn does have rings, then claim they tested Saturn for rings.

 

[River Jordan]

Let me get this straight.

You don't have it straight. You should read up on the history of moon exploration, it's pretty interesting.

Some scientists think the layer of moondust is deep.

So they send satellites to look down at it.

They find out that the layer of moondust is not deep.

So they claim they tested the layer?

That's like saying some scientists believe Saturn didn't have any rings, so they build a telescope and find out Saturn does have rings, then claim they tested Saturn for rings.

Please go read.

 

[sjastro]

See post 52 above.....tons of info there. A lot of scientifically backed data too.

AIG is renowned for its outrageous lies about mainstream science.

I have taken one of the linked articles on sites to illustrate this.

The Earth's Magnetic Field Is Young

The earth's magnetic field is a powerful witness for a world much younger than the billions of years required by evolutionary theories. Let's start the story with the most prominent feature of the field today--its very rapid decay. The Field Is Decaying Rapidly The average "intensity" of the...

www.icr.org

It didn’t take long to find the lie, scientists do not claim magnetic fields are stable for billions of years, instead the time between magnetic reversals is around 200,000 – 300,000 years while the magnetic reversal time itself is 1,000 – 10,000 years.

In the mid-Atlantic ridge the eruption of magmatic rock is driving sea floor spreading pushing the African and South American continents apart at an average rate of 2.5 cm/year which is also the rate of formation of the Atlantic Ocean basin.
Magmatic rocks contain iron rich minerals such as magnetite or hematite which act like tiny compass needles due to their ferromagnetic properties which align themselves to the Earth’s magnetic field. When the magmatic rock solidifies it provides a record of the direction of the magnetic field at the time. Since the sea floor is spreading a series of magnetic stripes are formed on both sides of the ridge recording the direction of the field at solidification.
By counting the number of stripes on either side of the ridge tells scientists the number of magnetic reversal periods which have occurred since sea floor spreading began. This is around 720 and given the time between reversals and the reversal time itself, the Atlantic Ocean began to form around 180 million years ago. This is also confirmed by dating rocks furthest away from the ridge along the African and South American continental shelves.

Now if the Earth is only 6000 years old and hundreds of reversals have occurred according to the link, there would be very few magnetic stripes around mid-Atlantic ridge. For example if the total time for magnetic reversal and stability time was 100 years, for a 6000 year Earth there would only be around 60 magnetic stripes.
This is the second and most common lie perpetrated by AIG, is lying by omission of the overwhelming evidence against a 6000 year old Earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Now if the Earth is only 6000 years old and hundreds of reversals have occurred according to the link, there would be very few magnetic stripes around mid-Atlantic ridge. For example if the total time for magnetic reversal and stability time was 100 years, for a 6000 year Earth there would only be around 60 magnetic stripes.
This is the second and most common lie perpetrated by AIG, is lying by omission of the overwhelming evidence against a 6000 year old Earth.

QV please:

It it does again, we Christians will probably get the blame for it.

Just like we did in AD 58, when it flipped, and Nero blamed us for it:

Acts 17:6 And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also;

Notice prior to AD 58, Jesus' parents lived in Galilee.

Luke 2:39 And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.

And notice how they got to Jerusalem:

Luke 2:42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.

Today, you go down to Jerusalem from Galilee, since Galilee is some 80 miles north of Jerusalem.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

On the third day of the creation week, Earth consisted of one giant ball of seawater.

Let's call it Terra Aqua, for lack of a better term.

View attachment 361158

Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land.

Then He commanded the waters to stand aside and let the land come to the surface.

View attachment 361159

Here's my question:

Are we expected to believe that that land consisted of millions and millions of years' worth of layers of fossils?

Including fossils of plants, which said plants weren't even created until later in the day?

I contend that God created only ONE LAYER, and calls that layer "Earth."

Not Hadean, Archean, Proterozoic, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, or any other kind of "zoic".

"Earth"

What say you?

I would think that the land in Genesis would not have the evidence of prior life forms because, like you say, they were not created yet. Of course some hold to a young earth which tells them that everything was already " built- in" to the system. But if that were the case, then God has set up confusion with the ultimate delusion. I think not! So the logical answer is,.....science is uncovering the truth. God made us a promise that knowledge will grow and increase as the years pass. So let's grow with it, shall we?
Blessings

 

[AV1611VET]

I would think that the land in Genesis would not have the evidence of prior life forms because, like you say, they were not created yet.

Adam lived with trilobites, dinosaurs, and his wife.

In fact, Eve may have had a favorite pet.

The dragon:

 

[David Lamb]

On the third day of the creation week, Earth consisted of one giant ball of seawater.

Let's call it Terra Aqua, for lack of a better term.

View attachment 361158

Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land.

Then He commanded the waters to stand aside and let the land come to the surface.

I fully agree with the biblical account of Creation. However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that God commanded the atoms to get together and form land. According to Genesis, we read:

“Then God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good.” (Ge 1:9-10 NKJV)

Nothing there about commanding atoms, as far as I can see.

 

[Aaron112]

I fully agree with the biblical account of Creation. However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that God commanded the atoms to get together and form land. ....

Nothing there about commanding atoms, as far as I can see.

Relax like a trusting little child enjoying Daddy's Creation.

water is made of atoms (supposedly - I've never seen an atom)..
dirt/ earth is made of atoms .....

All Creation was made thru Yeshua, and there is nothing that was made as if without Him.
All the 'things' He Created, Orchestrated, Directed, Forever and still going strong!
Are 'things' made of atoms. (spirituals and other invisibles too, but different subject)

 

[Aaron112]

In fact, Eve may have had a favorite pet.

HER HUSBAND! ADAM. She was made especially for ADAM, a suitable helper.

 

[Aaron112]

science is uncovering the truth.

Mankind hates truth. The cures for all diseases were known perfectly long, long ago. Who covered them up, even making them illegal to use in the usa (hint: science/druglords).

 

[David Lamb]

Relax like a trusting little child enjoying Daddy's Creation.

water is made of atoms (supposedly - I've never seen an atom)..
dirt/ earth is made of atoms .....

All Creation was made thru Yeshua, and there is nothing that was made as if without Him.
All the 'things' He Created, Orchestrated, Directed, Forever and still going strong!
Are 'things' made of atoms. (spirituals and other invisibles too, but different subject)

Yes, I know about all material things being made up of atoms. I didn't mean to deny that by my post. I just meant to question the statement, "Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land." According to Genesis, He made dry land by causing the seas to gather in seas, leaving the rest of the earth as dry land.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Adam lived with trilobites, dinosaurs, and his wife.

In fact, Eve may have had a favorite pet.

The dragon:

View attachment 361178

I'm pretty sure "Adam and Eve" didn't live with trilobites or dinosaurs. Or with literal, flesh and blood dragons either.

How about we just stick with Genesis 1-11 being a generic, prophetic account and concern ourselves more or less with "history" from Abraham to Acts?

And where natural history before the Patriarchs might be of interest, I'll just drive down Utah State Route 128 and think about it all....

(minute mark 37:00 to 58:00 is particularly breathtaking)

 

[AV1611VET]

Nothing there about commanding atoms, as far as I can see.

You're absolutely correct, David.

Nothing in writing about God commanding atoms to get together.

But seawater contains every natural element listed on the Periodic Table and, just as God took the dust of the ground and put it together to make Adam, I believe He did the same with the elements in sea water to make the dry land.

Keep in mind that the dust of the ground does not contain the elements in the exact proportions we find in humans.

For instance, nitrogen in dust ranges from 0.5% to 2%, depending on the location.

But the human body contains 3% nitrogen.

Thus I figure God "trimmed" a little atoms here and there and did some rearranging.

Same with the seawater to form the dry land.

 

[AV1611VET]

HER HUSBAND! ADAM. She was made especially for ADAM, a suitable helper.

Okie doke.

 

[AV1611VET]

How about we just stick with Genesis 1-11 being a generic, prophetic account and concern ourselves more or less with "history" from Abraham to Acts?

How about we not?

I find it hard to consider Genesis 1-11 generic, when specific names, places, dates, occurrences, and conversations are given.

Did Jude take Genesis generically?

Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Not to mention Jesus taking both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 literally.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

How about we not?

I find it hard to consider Genesis 1-11 generic, when specific names, places, dates, occurrences, and conversations are given.

I mean, 'generic' from our point of view, not from that of Moses (or whoever the emending scribe was who put Genesis together in its final form.)

I'm sure that Moses and his revisors meant very well for Genesis 1, 2 and 3 to smack a hair-lip on the mouths of those who asserted the common, prior Mesopotamian, Egyptican and Ugaritic perspectives that remained extant on 'who made Who.'

Did Jude take Genesis generically?

Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Jude's citing of "Enoch" isn't exactly an example of Jude taking Genesis literally. If anything, your quote merely shows that Jude valued the pseudepigraphical book, 1 Enoch, from which he quoted.

​

Does Jude quote Enoch?

The blurred boundary between canonical and non-canonical texts.

biblicalhistoricalcontext.com

So, you may want to rely less than you do on your present response as a solid rejoinder to what I said. I see your intent, and I appreciate that but ........................

As for Jude himself, I'd think he assumed Genesis was the Word of God and provided the literal paradigm for the world's teleology and moral structure. And Jude's writing is still one for us to take seriously on moral grounds for self-evaluation in God's Spirit.

Not to mention Jesus taking both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 literally.

I'm sure that Jesus, while in His earthly tent, was limited in His overall understanding. I'm not sure why this would surprise us since Jesus wasn't All-knowing while living on Earth and would most likely have assumed the authority and relevance of the first two chapters of the book of Genesis in a more literal way.

I accept the authority of Genesis 1 and 2 as well, but not literally. I do so contextually, and from the disadvantaged viewpoint of a 21st century historical vagabond.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sure that Jesus, while in His earthly tent, was limited in His overall understanding.

Same with me.

I, in my earthly tent, am limited in overall understanding.

I'm not sure why this would surprise us since Jesus wasn't All-knowing while living on Earth and would most likely have assumed the authority and relevance of the first two chapters of the book of Genesis in a more literal way.

Then I'll do the same.

I accept the authority of Genesis 1 and 2 as well, but not literally.

Because you don't want to make the same mistake that Jesus made?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Same with me.

I, in my earthly tent, am limited in overall understanding.



Then I'll do the same.



Because you don't want to make the same mistake that Jesus made?

I think I implied the answer to this question in my previous post. Maybe, reread it if you get the time.