[quote]jjackkrash wrote:Its tough to square a 6000 year old universe with the speed of light and the observable/measurable distances of other stars and galaxies. If that doesn’t sway you I’m not sure there exists any type of evidence that could or would.[/quote]God created an “adult” universe. Just He created an adult man.
[/quote]
To look at the Hubble Deep Space field, though, is to look at something that happened 13 billion years ago. It’s not an image of an adult universe, it’s an image of an extremely young universe which took billions of years to arrive at our eyes.
So for your analogy to hold up, we’d have to not only be presented with an adult Adam, but with an Adam who had somehow had a childhood that we could talk about despite the fact that he had been created as an adult.[/quote]Or so we are absolutely convinced right now. Like we once were of a geocentric non solar system. Or that IS how it looks and that’s how God created it to look. Like I say. This is not the battlefield anyway. The battle that matters is far more basic than this. Dare I say it again? Until we know HOW we now anything at all? ANY discussion of WHAT we think we know is so much mental masturbation. A god who can fit between your ears or mine is not the true and living God of the Christian scriptures. Here’s something people don’t’ wanna hear. The God I know and love is not desperate for people to believe him and has provided faaaaar more “evidence” than any of us has a right to. He could have damned every last one of us and provided no salvation for anybody and been absolutely just and holy in so doing. Once a man understands sin and the holiness of God, the fact that He saves ANYbody is mercy indeed.
To quote Dr. Voddie Bachaum, “God’s not runnin for God ya’ll”. He is not wringing His hands and hoping somebody will believe Him. All those that He has given to the Son WILL come to Him and of them He will lose none, but raise them up at the last day. To quote Jesus Himself practically verbatim.
That’s not the Jesus we know in modern America though. That guy is a false messiah. A tolerant, broad minded, bleeding heart, hippified, limp wristed weakling created in the image of men who hate the real one.
Believe what you want. I can’t help that. I can tolerate atheistic hatemongers all day long. I will only become actually agitated when somebody tries to smear their unholy heretical slop on His face. You’ll see pretty quick here with some of these Hymenaeus and Alexander types around here that as soon as the dialog turns to what Christians have believed throughout all of history as proclaimed in the bible and the conversation comes to an abrupt halt. Why? Because they don’t REALLY believe that stuff LOL. They just think it’s cool to call themselves “Christian” so they can allegedly demonstrate how broad they think the way is even though Jesus said it is narrow and few find it.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Or so we are absolutely convinced right now. Like we once were of a geocentric non solar system. Or that IS how it looks and that’s how God created it to look. Like I say. This is not the battlefield anyway. The battle that matters is far more basic than this. Dare I say it again? Until we know HOW we now anything at all? ANY discussion of WHAT we think we know is so much mental masturbation.[/quote]
Understood. I hope you’ll reply to my post in “Creationism.”
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m not aware of anywhere in the Christian Bible that claims the earth is only 6,000 years old. Granted I’m not a Biblical scholar and it might just be there but I’ve never read it. I can see how interpretation might lead some to believe that, but as I said I really don’t think it makes a direct claim.[/quote]
It is based on the genealogies supplied in the Pentateuch, which lead to the conclusion that the Earth is something like 6,000 years old if they’re regarded as inerrant and exhaustive.[/quote]
But genealoogies in order to be accurate time wise would also have to include the ages of each person.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You’re right on schedule schedule Doc. I did not say this. I did say that macro evolution is utterly destructive of the history of sin and redemption revealed in the bible.
[/quote]
Yeah thats true.
I like that POV better than those who make fun of people who do not believe in evolution and immediately go apeshit (Ha!) if you point out that they are animals themselves and that their responses were formed by evolutionary pressures.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m not aware of anywhere in the Christian Bible that claims the earth is only 6,000 years old. Granted I’m not a Biblical scholar and it might just be there but I’ve never read it. I can see how interpretation might lead some to believe that, but as I said I really don’t think it makes a direct claim.[/quote]
It is based on the genealogies supplied in the Pentateuch, which lead to the conclusion that the Earth is something like 6,000 years old if they’re regarded as inerrant and exhaustive.[/quote]
But genealoogies in order to be accurate time wise would also have to include the ages of each person.
I’m not buying that the Bible makes such a claim.[/quote]
What? Have you read the Bible?
The genealogies do provide ages. That’s how the timeline was compiled. This isn’t a question of “buying” or “not buying” something: look it up and see that a literal interpretation of the Old Testament yields Young Eartherism.
How could we interpret a genealogy if we do not interpret it literally ?
What (the hell) would be the non-literal, metaphorical meaning of a genealogy ?
Expanding earth theory has often been a fun mental masturbation concept for me to play with when trying to come up with an explanation that would cover both a 4.5 billion hear old earth and maybe even the great flood. A smaller earth would probably spin faster, accounting for quicker days and more “compacted” time. Smaller might also affect gravity, allowing for the vast mass of some of the dinosaurs. Heck, on a smaller earth that spun twice as fast I would be 92 years old and just having recently sired two children.
[quote]H factor wrote:<<< I can assure you I’m not snickering, I’ve been trying to understand. >>>[/quote]Fair enough man. I actually typed you a short message telling you what a hurry I was in a few hours ago and then forgot to click the submit button because I was in such hurry. Still am. I will respond though.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Orion: I think you misunderstood me.[/quote]I dont think I did.[/quote]I view evolution as a Satanic deception and a very successful one that has polluted the church and robbed her of credibility and power. All by God’s definitions and standards. Of course the modernist pagans will try n say that evolution makes the gospel accessible to people who wouldn’t otherwise accept it. Arrogant idolatry it is to poison God’s holy Word with the pathetic wisdom of men in an effort to help God out. His command is to preach the gospel and leave the results to him. Faithless apostates in love with the world cannot suffer the Word in it’s purity. This nation is an object lesson in what happens when the CHURCH is unfaithful to her master and goes whoring after other Gods. It reminds me of King Saul who presumed to take it upon himself to improve God’s command by bringing the Amalekites livestock back to Israel to be sacrificed instead of exterminating it like God said. Here is God’s view of people who do this.
[quote]“22b - Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,
as in obeying the voice of the Lord?
Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,
and to listen than the fat of rams.
23 - For rebellion is as the sin of divination,
and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the Lord,
he has also rejected you from being king.”[/quote]
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Orion: I think you misunderstood me.[/quote]I dont think I did.[/quote]I view evolution as a Satanic deception and a very successful one that has polluted the church and robbed her of credibility and power. All by God’s definitions and standards. Of course the modernist pagans will try n say that evolution makes the gospel accessible to people who wouldn’t otherwise accept it. Arrogant idolatry it is to poison God’s holy Word with the pathetic wisdom of men in an effort to help God out. His command is to preach the gospel and leave the results to him. Faithless apostates in love with the world cannot suffer the Word in it’s purity. This nation is an object lesson in what happens when the CHURCH is unfaithful to her master and goes whoring after other Gods. It reminds me of King Saul who presumed to take it upon himself to improve God’s command by bringing the Amalekites livestock back to Israel to be sacrificed instead of exterminating it like God said. Here is God’s view of people who do this.
[/quote]
Yeah, I know.
I dont agree, but I understand.
There are people though who are soooo far above people who do not believe in evolution until, suddenly, they discover that “we are not animals”, that “we can grow beyond that” and whatnot.
I’m up to my eyeballs in work and have to be up at six so I’ll be limited tonight.
Orion, I’m not trying to be unnecessarily difficult, but I’m not following what you’re saying. It may be my fault, but I’m not. Forgive me for asking you to elucidate a bit further if you would please.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m not aware of anywhere in the Christian Bible that claims the earth is only 6,000 years old. Granted I’m not a Biblical scholar and it might just be there but I’ve never read it. I can see how interpretation might lead some to believe that, but as I said I really don’t think it makes a direct claim.[/quote]
It is based on the genealogies supplied in the Pentateuch, which lead to the conclusion that the Earth is something like 6,000 years old if they’re regarded as inerrant and exhaustive.[/quote]
But genealoogies in order to be accurate time wise would also have to include the ages of each person.
I’m not buying that the Bible makes such a claim.[/quote]
What? Have you read the Bible?
The genealogies do provide ages. That’s how the timeline was compiled. This isn’t a question of “buying” or “not buying” something: look it up and see that a literal interpretation of the Old Testament yields Young Eartherism.[/quote]
I think you’re wrong, the Bible doesn’t say how long each person lived. I know the passage that you’re referring to.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m up to my eyeballs in work and have to be up at six so I’ll be limited tonight.
Orion, I’m not trying to be unnecessarily difficult, but I’m not following what you’re saying. It may be my fault, but I’m not. Forgive me for asking you to elucidate a bit further if you would please.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m up to my eyeballs in work and have to be up at six so I’ll be limited tonight.
Orion, I’m not trying to be unnecessarily difficult, but I’m not following what you’re saying. It may be my fault, but I’m not. Forgive me for asking you to elucidate a bit further if you would please.
[/quote]
YOU, actually understand the TOE and its implications for your world view, therefore you reject it.
Other people take it for granted, little herd animals that they are, until it starts to deliver some inconvenient conclusions.
Then they go all fundamentalist on me, because what ought not be true cannot be true, even though it fits their suppossedly accepted paradigm.
At least your world view, which is definitely not mine, is consistent.
He is saying that you’re wrong about evolution, but with integrity.
Unlike all the so-called evolutionists who conveniently ignore the social darwinist consequences of evolutionism.
Those people may be right about evolution, but they are hypocrits since they do not accordingly acknowledge the fact that they are 99,99999% similar to bonobos.
[quote]kamui wrote:
He is saying that you’re wrong about evolution, but with integrity.
Unlike all the so-called evolutionists who conveniently ignore the social darwinist consequences of evolutionism.
Those people may be right about evolution, but they are hypocrits since they do not accordingly acknowledge the fact that they are 99,99999% similar to bonobos.
[quote]kamui wrote:
He is saying that you’re wrong about evolution, but with integrity.
Unlike all the so-called evolutionists who conveniently ignore the social darwinist consequences of evolutionism.
Those people may be right about evolution, but they are hypocrits since they do not accordingly acknowledge the fact that they are 99,99999% similar to bonobos.
I’m inclined to agree.
(edit : but i’m too slow)[/quote]
I want you.
Full homo.
[/quote]
well, FWIW, my residual gayness only manifest itself when there is at least two girls and some (good) Bordeaux involved.
Weed, on the other hand, is optionnal
Those people may be right about evolution, but they are hypocrits since they do not accordingly acknowledge the fact that they are 99,99999% similar to bonobos.
[/quote]
Who are all of these hypocrites that believe in evolution but don’t believe we’re genetically similar to simians? I have yet to come across one.
