getting dates about a young earth
- Thread starter Dan_473
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Here is the TRUTH. It is not possible to accurately date anything over 4,000 years ago, because prior to the Flood the atmosphere was ENTIRELY different. i will say that again, the atmosphere prior to the Flood was entirely different than the atmosphere we have now. Everything, plants, animals, and humans all lived extremely long ages, because of that atmosphere. All methods of determining age today is based solely on if the same atmosphere we have now is the same we have always had. This is not the case, therefore no method of determining age over 4,000 years ago will be accurate.
i am trying to come up with an analogy to better understand what i am talking about, so bare with me.
Its like we are all fish, living under the water. And our fish scientist have come up with a method of determining how old a certain rock at the bottom of the ocean is, based on certain molecules that are in the water absorb into the rock at a a rate of one per year, therefore they can determine how old the rock is by how many of those molecules are in the rock, if there are 20 molecules in the rock, that would mean the rock is 20 years old. The problem is however, that method is only good if that particular rock has always been under water. But that particular rock a thousand years ago was not under water, but in a totally different environment called AIR, it was not in any water, therefore no water molecules were entering into the rock.
i'm afraid that wasn't very good. But my point is, the method we use to determine age of things today is based solely on the assumption the atmosphere we have today is the atmosphere we have always had. Scriptures plainly teaches there was a different atmosphere 4,000 years ago. Men lived to be almost a thousand years old, it did not rain in that atmosphere. So trying to measure the age of something today based on the atmosphere we have today, when 4,000 years ago the atmosphere was entirely different, is like those fish trying to determine the age of a rock based on the assumption that that rock has always been under water. Do you see the fallacy here?
i will say it again, and it is the TRUTH :It is not possible to accurately date anything over 4,000 years ago, because prior to the Flood the atmosphere was ENTIRELY different.
^i^
i am trying to come up with an analogy to better understand what i am talking about, so bare with me.
Its like we are all fish, living under the water. And our fish scientist have come up with a method of determining how old a certain rock at the bottom of the ocean is, based on certain molecules that are in the water absorb into the rock at a a rate of one per year, therefore they can determine how old the rock is by how many of those molecules are in the rock, if there are 20 molecules in the rock, that would mean the rock is 20 years old. The problem is however, that method is only good if that particular rock has always been under water. But that particular rock a thousand years ago was not under water, but in a totally different environment called AIR, it was not in any water, therefore no water molecules were entering into the rock.
i'm afraid that wasn't very good. But my point is, the method we use to determine age of things today is based solely on the assumption the atmosphere we have today is the atmosphere we have always had. Scriptures plainly teaches there was a different atmosphere 4,000 years ago. Men lived to be almost a thousand years old, it did not rain in that atmosphere. So trying to measure the age of something today based on the atmosphere we have today, when 4,000 years ago the atmosphere was entirely different, is like those fish trying to determine the age of a rock based on the assumption that that rock has always been under water. Do you see the fallacy here?
i will say it again, and it is the TRUTH :It is not possible to accurately date anything over 4,000 years ago, because prior to the Flood the atmosphere was ENTIRELY different.
^i^
I can understand why you say that.
in the course of our discussion of whether God could have made the universe "already in motion", I've said things that a lot of yec's say.
in gen 1, God treats them like adults, saying they will "rule over the fish of the sea."
in gen 2, the implication I read is that God puts adam in eden to cultivate it.
I read it that they are treated as adults both in chap 1 and 2... though I like to think of them as teenagers more.
in the course of our discussion of whether God could have made the universe "already in motion", I've said things that a lot of yec's say.
in gen 1, God treats them like adults, saying they will "rule over the fish of the sea."
in gen 2, the implication I read is that God puts adam in eden to cultivate it.
I read it that they are treated as adults both in chap 1 and 2... though I like to think of them as teenagers more.
T
Here's one (ridiculous) replacement theory. I know there are others, but I'm not familiar with them.
No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
Last edited by a moderator:
a small amount of bandwidth, sure...
also, I encourage people to look up passages for themselves.
I decline your request to "show us".
instead, I will say that as I read it, when samuel goes to anoint david king, God advises samuel to deal with saul in such a way that the truth is veiled from saul. I'm interested in what you see when you read it.
also, I encourage people to look up passages for themselves.
I decline your request to "show us".
instead, I will say that as I read it, when samuel goes to anoint david king, God advises samuel to deal with saul in such a way that the truth is veiled from saul. I'm interested in what you see when you read it.
T
Here are some more, but they've been thoroughly refuted over the years. LOL at this excerpt:
We’ve avoided religious or mythological creation stories for the origin of the universe so far, but we can make an exception for Hindu creation stories, which can be reconciled with scientific theories with an ease that escapes most other religious cosmologies. Carl Sagan once said, “It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang.”
Of course, Carl. Do you really think Charles Darwin came up with the theory for evolution?
10 Alternatives To The Conventional Big Bang Theory - Listverse
We’ve avoided religious or mythological creation stories for the origin of the universe so far, but we can make an exception for Hindu creation stories, which can be reconciled with scientific theories with an ease that escapes most other religious cosmologies. Carl Sagan once said, “It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang.”
Of course, Carl. Do you really think Charles Darwin came up with the theory for evolution?
10 Alternatives To The Conventional Big Bang Theory - Listverse
S
Really??? I thought it is the Word of God.
If Science is to be our guide, even partially, then what does science say about...
parting of the Red Sea.
Exodus 14:21-29
the sun moving backwards
Isa 38:8
water into wine
John 2:6-10
walking on water, calming of the weather
Mat 14:24-33
Ten Plagues of Egypt
Ex 7:14 - 12:36
Balaam and his talking donkey
Num 22:28
I'm still new to all of this so I am probably missing something obvious??
If Science is to be our guide, even partially, then what does science say about...
parting of the Red Sea.
Exodus 14:21-29
the sun moving backwards
Isa 38:8
water into wine
John 2:6-10
walking on water, calming of the weather
Mat 14:24-33
Ten Plagues of Egypt
Ex 7:14 - 12:36
Balaam and his talking donkey
Num 22:28
I'm still new to all of this so I am probably missing something obvious??
Re: Stalling...
true! a better reason is I encourage people to look up passages for themselves.
anyone who reads through the bible regularly will come to the passage. when you read it, I'm interested in your take on it... pm me if the thread is done, plzzz
do you remember reading about samuel anointing david?
true! a better reason is I encourage people to look up passages for themselves.
anyone who reads through the bible regularly will come to the passage. when you read it, I'm interested in your take on it... pm me if the thread is done, plzzz
do you remember reading about samuel anointing david?
E
Your new, so you have not bought into the relgion that some call church.. And things some poeple say just do not make sense to you..
Like why does God not have power to make the heavens and earth AGED.. and in seven literal days..
Keep on trucking, do not question the power of God.. that belittles him, and I am sure he is not happy.
Keep testing things..
Like why does God not have power to make the heavens and earth AGED.. and in seven literal days..
Keep on trucking, do not question the power of God.. that belittles him, and I am sure he is not happy.
Keep testing things..