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.
“Relying on the opinions of celebrity preachers is not a new phenomenon in the church then. Kind Regards”
Point 1. Spurgeon was not just a celebrity preacher; he was a very well read man. See, for example: Commenting & CommentariesCatalogue
Point 2. I have not said that I agree with anything that Spurgeon preached.
If the scientific interpretation differs from the Bible, I'll go with miracle.I'm not asking about pre-flood layers. I'm asking you to explain how you get 420,000 layers (that's what they have from the Vostok core) laid down with just a few minutes between each layer with all the volcanism and climate change recorded in each layer. Assuming 1 year post flood we're looking at 1100 layers per day, thats 45-50 layers per hour. There's massive amounts of heat and energy required, yet you just want us to accept that it happened. It's your claim, so please explain how it could happen.
Thank you for sharing this with us!Here is more on Spurgeon's views-- Charles H. Spurgeon and the Age of the Earth.
The bible says nothing about antarctic ice formation, and you're calling God deceptive (again). You choose to add to the bible - which is something the bible says quite a lot about. Proverbs 30:6 "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." That's pretty harsh.If the scientific interpretation differs from the Bible, I'll go with miracle.
You're insinuating God is deceptive, not me.The bible says nothing about antarctic ice formation, and you're calling God deceptive (again). You choose to add to the bible - which is something the bible says quite a lot about. Proverbs 30:6 "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." That's pretty harsh.
So the writers of the New Testament were liars?The bible says nothing about antarctic ice formation, and you're calling God deceptive (again). You choose to add to the bible - which is something the bible says quite a lot about. Proverbs 30:6 "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." That's pretty harsh.
You're insinuating God is deceptive, not me.
or, #3. God's Miracle, like the rest of CreationIt's implied by the evidence and your insistence on a short age.
There are hundreds of thousands of layers in the Antarctic ice.
The layers are consistent with an annual deposition pattern.
There are radioactive markers consistent with the notion #layers = #years.
There are dust grains and volcanic ash in the layers that can be dated and are also consistent with the annual layer hypothesis.
Therefore, either:
1. The ice sheet is hundreds of thousands of years old and built by slow annual accumulation,
-OR-
2. The ice sheet is much younger and *someone* made it look like it does to provide indications of vast age.
If you want to pick #2, then someone is deceptive and that someone could not be a human.
This is your choice to resolve the evidence.
You cannot escape the process of science. Even if you assume the Bible writers were infallible--I don't--you still have the issue that it was delivered to you through the sciences of textual study and translation.If the scientific interpretation differs from the Bible, I'll go with miracle.
How does a miracle preclude deception? God made it look like hundreds of thousands of years when, in fact, it was only a few hours(?). That's deceptive, no matter how it was achieved.or, #3. God's Miracle, like the rest of Creation
That's lack of understanding on our part.How does a miracle preclude deception? God made it look like hundreds of thousands of years when, in fact, it was only a few hours(?). That's deceptive, no matter how it was achieved.
How is that in any way relevant to the question before us?I define embedded age as "maturity without history."
Adam, for example, came into existence some twenty or thirty years old.
Can God create a dress tomorrow, so old it falls apart with age?
or, #3. God's Miracle, like the rest of Creation
Thousands of blizzards.It's implied by the evidence and your insistence on a short age.
There are hundreds of thousands of layers in the Antarctic ice.
The layers are consistent with thousands of blizzards.The layers are consistent with an annual deposition pattern.
Once again, this thinking reflects that of a very slow gradual build-up of everything in the layer, never considering the possibility that the layers of ice were also laid down quickly with a smorgasbord of snow contents belched up from a world being torn apart, and that could or could not be related to the time frame in which it was occurring. For scientists, it has to be a slow orderly process because that’s all they can understand, and have to keep that model throughout for TOE.
Better if you said it in the firstIf the scientific interpretation differs from the Bible, I'll go with miracle.
Thousands of blizzards.
The layers are consistent with thousands of blizzards.
We've discussed this before, haven't we?How is that in any way relevant to the question before us?
Again, we are looking at fossils in the earth that scientists say show the earth is many millions of years old. Where did these fossils come from. Christians who cannot accept that old age generally offer one of two objections.
1. Some say the earth was made with all those fossils and rocks down there on day one. This is the Omphalos hypothesis. You have written things that seem to agree with this, but now say you disagree with this.
2. Others say Noah's flood (and perhaps other OT catastrophies) account for most of the fossils down there. This is a central tenant of the Creation Science [sic] movement. You seem to now support this view based on the flood, while at the same time saying you disagree with virtually everything Creation Science says. That makes no sense.
Now you offer a view: "maturity without history". How does this in any way address the question before us? How did all those fossils get there?
As if they don't study the formation of*Hundreds* of thousands of "blizzards".
But the *much* bigger problem for the "young" age of the ice sheet is that the tracers embedded in the ice age at the 1 layer = 1 year rate.
I guess an inquiring mind as defined by you is one that stops enquiring when the facts detract from previous beliefs.If the scientific interpretation differs from the Bible, I'll go with miracle.
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?