- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
If it was created 6000 years ago, the billions of years old thing is how it looked when it was made, not time.
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.
If it was created 6000 years ago, the billions of years old thing is how it looked when it was made, not time.Nope, nope, nope... he says it is billions of years old... and 6,000 years old.
Am I talking to a wall? Ask. Him. Yourself.
I think the modern name for that is science.I must have missed that rule. And the HI theory has nothing to do with reality. It's all just made up stuff.
?? What in tarnation are you talking about?
You think Scripture supports Noah living millions of years ago or Adam?
I think it looks old to those that judge what is old by a godless religious philosophy and methodology. Take away the assumptions of a same state past on earth and we lose all meaning relating to time when looking at isotopes. The looking old is 100% part of the religion. Nothing else.Barbarian observes:
In other words, instead of adjusting the evidence by "God could just have created the world last (Tuesday, Year, Century, Whatever) and made it look like it was much older", why not just accept the evidence for what it is? After all, as you've been reminded numerous times, there's nothing in scripture to make us believe otherwise.
The different nature in heaven and the future is not a zillion miracles, so much as the God created new state and nature we will have. Same idea for the past.I'm speaking of the practice of pulling an unscriptural miracle out of one's hat as a way dealing with the evidence being incompatible with one's beliefs. Bad idea; avoid it.
We know when Noah was here. We know Methuselah died just before the flood. We now how many parents or grandparents were involved from Adam to Methuselah. We have a lot more than a clue we have the record.Scripture give us no clue as to how long ago he lived.
If it was created 6000 years ago, the billions of years old thing is how it looked when it was made, not time.
AV1611VET says otherwise.
What are you so afraid of?
ASK.
HIM.
YOURSELF.
No thanks.
Imaginary time = science time = evo time.
Your fear is noted.
Then you get to call AV1611VET an "evo" for believing in imaginary billions of years... or at least you would if you weren't afraid of him.
Why quibble? If the world was created at the time of Adam, who cares how 'old' it looks to cultists of so called science??
It's the HI Theory, you can think whatever you want.
If dad thinks I'm an evo, it ain't no thang.Then you get to call AV1611VET an "evo" for believing in imaginary billions of years... or at least you would if you weren't afraid of him.
If dad thinks I'm an evo, it ain't no thang.
Dad is my brother-in-Christ.
We're Blood brothers.
That means we're more closely related than blood brothers.
Ha. Trying to get folks to quibble and argue eh?So he can misrepresent what you believe without consequences... it has nothing to do with what he says or does, but only who he is?
Interesting. One would think you'd at least explain your position to him... so at least he'll stop getting it wrong.
Ha. Trying to get folks to quibble and argue eh?
What matters is that we know Jesus created it all. Not whether we play pin the date tail on the already created donkey.
Not me that's doing it, friend... If you and AV want to hold separate and mutually exclusive definitions of "time" and then claim it doesn't matter as long as you're both Christians, then you've already shown that the truth is irrelevant as long as you're part of the same "in" crowd.
So maybe the Earth is 6,000 years old... or 4.5 billion years old... or cobbled together last Thursday... the truth is, you never cared in the first place.
Misrepresent or disagree?So he can misrepresent what you believe ...
Three points here:TLK Valentine said:Interesting. One would think you'd at least explain your position to him... so at least he'll stop getting it wrong.
We'll answer to God ... not you ... for our beliefs.... the truth is, you never cared in the first place.
My issue was with the imaginary time science claims. For example, what they consider the first man was millions of their imaginary years back.
The flood, if it was around the KT layer somewhere (?) was some 70 million imaginary science years back. In reality it was closer to 4500 real years. The way science tells time in the past is strictly by using the clocks of the here and now.
Misrepresent or disagree?
Three points here:
1. He's entitled to his opinion.
2. We aren't going to have perfect unity until Jesus Christ comes back.
3. Unity means nothing to unbelievers.
This shows clearly by the fact that 100% of us believe IN THE BEGINNING, GOD, and yet unbelievers still exist.
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?