Age of the Oyth

  • 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.
L

Larry_Stotle

Guest
#21
Well, using your argument from Peter "a day is a thousand years" yada yada then it could have been 6000 years.

Anyways, I'm up early tomorrow - so g'night folks, and g'day to RinTintin.

I'll be back....you too will become one...you will be inducted, resistance is futile, my capacitance for discussion never gets fully charged, it's Faraday yeaaa
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T

Tintin

Guest
#22
Well, using your argument from Peter "a day is a thousand years" yada yada then it could have been 6000 years.

Anyways, I'm up early tomorrow - so g'night folks, and g'day to RinTintin.

I'll be back....you too will become one...you will be inducted, resistance is futile, my capacitance for discussion never gets fully charged, it's Faraday yeaaa
The passage from Peter? Goodness, how simple. That's a very obvious simile, nothing more. Certainly not something to be used to argue for an old earth (either theistic evolution or day-age or the gap theory).
 
Feb 16, 2014
903
2
0
#23
When Darwin wrote, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", did his throry of evolution cause scientists to believe the earth must be older than what the Bible says? What did Darwin mean by "favored races"?
He was referring to different species of animals, which is clear if you read his works. He was not referring to different races of humans, as many dishonest critics of Darwin like to claim.
 
Aug 31, 2013
89
2
0
#24
I just can't help but laugh when i see christians pitting science vs God(religion). This is futile effort and not even according to doctrine. I don't use science to validate God. God is not against science, rather he supports/respects/acknowledges science and then he transcends science. It's not so hard to understand. Science on the other hand CANNOT validate God, because the concept of God does not make an scientifc sense, thus: God's transcendence. Science is simply the observation/demonstration of literal phenomena. Period. No more, no less. Don't force God to conform to scientific methods.

If we could merge science and God, then there'd be no such thing as miracles and God himself would have to be subject to the laws of nature. We'd be able to define God, quantify Him, isolate a God-matter and predict it's(his) behaviour.

The scriptures clearly separates God's methods from scientific reasoning where it states that:

That which is impossible with men(wisdom of men, science) is very possible with God.

It also states:

18For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19For it is written,
“I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE
(science),
AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER
(science)I WILL SET ASIDE.”

20Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom(science) of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom(science) did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom(science); 23but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, 24but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

Note: Paul speaks about two categories of people here: The religious, dogmatic people(the Jews) and the literal/scientific minded people(the Greeks). Both fail to know God.

Lastly, Darwinian evolution is not science. It's simply an interpretation(that cannot be scientifically observed nor demonstrated) imposed on the evidence, Just as creationism itself(cannot be scientifically observed) is also an interpretation imposed on the evidence. But the secular world and education system is comfortable with the notion of evolution, and they are supposed to. It's easier to teach something(evolution) that has a semblance of objectivity/science than to teach God in schools. So, do not be offended, do not stress when people who follow purely scientific views oppose the idea of God, science was created/predestined precisely to do so. And you trying to demonstrate God scientifically are not doing God any favours.

So, did God create the universe in six literal days? It's possible, but not scientific, thus it being supernatural. I also have no problem with an old earth theory either. Why? because these things don't really even matter to me. There are a lot of mysteries we don't know, nor are we required to know them. These mysteries of how exactly the universe "became" don't determine christian doctrine. Yes, I believe God created the universe, but don't expect me to explain how he did it, just as i cannot explain how some other person was miraculously healed of cancer or AIDS.
 
Last edited:
T

Tintin

Guest
#25
He was referring to different species of animals, which is clear if you read his works. He was not referring to different races of humans, as many dishonest critics of Darwin like to claim.
But people are animals, according to Darwin.
 
O

Osiyo

Guest
#26
What the hell, satan shooting off his big mouth again, and what do the blood bought do? Nothing, I went to dictionary dot com and this is the result => Oyth - no dictionary results, word does not exist, what's the point to be learned here? Point in fact. Darwin is so full of it that he stinks, did he not state (he did) "that if the cell is complex (entire bio factories inside), my entire hypothesis is worth nothing, and again we have gone farther down the time line but the fossils (the fossil record is very incomplete, increasingly so further back in time).

Come on brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus, do we not see the direct attach against God? Against all that He claimed about (let there be light, and there was light) the creation, Darwin and those that follow are following a religion of their own and I would really love to have the amount of faith they bring to light. Man oh man, satan standing there screaming at the top of his lungs and we don't say or do anything, this is in direct opposition to God, and what is against God is against Christ. This is down right dangerous and we shut up. To our shame, be blessed brothers and sisters, but be also ashamed because we do not in love stand up and say NO GO JOE!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Timeline

Senior Member
Mar 20, 2014
1,826
17
38
#27
For a woody literalist no..but yom can mean more that just a day. And I'll be going into that later.
You have lost even me on this one Larry. I do accept that the bible does say the earth was here before day 1. I will even agree that things "evolve" (within reason). Such as the same animal growing more hair in colder environments that it does in warmer environments. But to accept the "evolution theory" is beyond me. There are billions of missing fossils; and I'm not just talking about from monkey to man - but from single -celled organism to, well everything. In their own "history of the earth" table they show dinosaurs very close to the beginning. We have dinosaur bones, even dinosaurs the size of dogs. And yet they have very little to show for all these transformations (because they didn't happen). Furthermore, you would still see all the stages today. You would have your evolution "rank" on your driver's license provided you were evolved enough to drive.

Older earth - maybe
Evolution Theory - Absolutely Not
 
T

tarzan

Guest
#28
Any scientist worth their salt would realize that something can appear by all accounts to be a certain age and yet it not be so. Instruments only measure what is apparent - not what is real. I have seen 40 year olds that look 70. Analysis of the body would reveal such s thing. And yet witnesses would say, No, definitely 40. I always find it ironic that those who consider their instruments worthy are the same who forget we have designed technology that can accelerate processes. Have you heard of synthetic diamonds? Your instruments will provide an artificial age, not taking into account the artificiality of the process, except that by our standards the conditions were more controlled. If us feeble scientists with our feeble technology can recreate and discern such a process, then why do we deny God's power, in that He created nature a much higher form of technology, and yet it also is cast into the oven.

I will never relate to the lazy scientist that only considers what is directly before him, not taking all things into account.

That being said, using Ellen White as a scare tactic to drive people away from considering a relatively young (in actual time) earth is an excellent easy way to scare those who focus merely on doctrine away from considering all things. But I imagine if they get caught up that simply means yet another lesson, hopefully, it that the wheat is separated from the chaff.

At any rate, I dare a man to say he knows the length of time as we know it. I will show you a man without consideration. God has always been and always will be and I think that matters much more.
 
L

Larry_Stotle

Guest
#29
Listen up Tarzan - you are on my ignore list - which means I don't want to hear from you or have you posting in my threads.
 
2

2Thewaters

Guest
#30
Evolution was invented my Satan in a seance and the witch was told to inform charles Darwin he would be a good candidate for the perpetration of the satanic theory that would envelope the world, for satan would give all his evil angels power to hypnotize wherever evolution is taught.
documented fact on internet go search

Evolution is totally backward science...
things do not build themselves in any laboratory and the fact that random production of chemicals produces vastly more poisonous chemicals than good ones ensures evolution is just hypnotic delusion to people who want to believe it.

You can only hypnotize people who VOLUNTEER and want to be hypnotized.
and most people dont want a rigorous religion and will take any excuse to do what they want
satan knows this

but please do not call evolution SCIENCE

for science fundamentally is
REPRODUCIBLE RESULTS in the laboratory...

Evolution has not been demonstrated even one time in any laboraory and trillions and trillions of lifeform reproduce each year always according to species
evolutionists are dense fools who want to die and enjoy themselves while doing it.
 
L

Larry_Stotle

Guest
#31
READ MY LIPS FOLKS BEFORE YOU HEAD OFF ON YOUR RANTS - THE THREAD IS ABOUT THE AGE OF THE EARTH - OYTH.
 
2

2Thewaters

Guest
#32
Who cares?
the earth was without form and void and the spirit transformed it
it was the same age as the rest of the universe.

so the things made from it are dated as older than creation
this is not rocket science.

People who dont want to believce the bible have a good excuse to die
ones who do believe go on faith
it changes nobodies future.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oct 12, 2013
233
3
0
#33
Very revealing; For one who doesn't take God's Word that literal will bend and yield to the currents of time.
Let's at least not pretend that evolution is science.

lets go a step further ... evolution is a religion!

God bless.
 
2

2Thewaters

Guest
#34
Of course it is.
The witch who told Darwin he was the chosen one told him the angel of light invented it.
It is not from God.
 
L

Larry_Stotle

Guest
#35
I do and so do others.

Study: Why Young Christians Leave the Church​

By Jeff Schapiro, Christian Post Reporter
September 28, 2011 4:32 pm

Nearly three out of every five young Christians disconnect from their churches after the age of 15, but why? A new research study released by the Barna Group points to six different reasons as to why young people aren't staying in their pews.

The results of this study come from the interviews of teenagers, young adults, youth pastors, senior pastors and parents that were taken over the course of five years.

First, the study says, churches appear to be overprotective. Nearly one-fourth of the 18- to 29-year-olds interviewed said “Christians demonize everything outside of the church” most of the time. Twenty-two percent also said the church ignores real-world problems and 18 percent said that their church was too concerned about the negative impact of movies, music and video games.

Many young adults also feel that their experience of Christianity was shallow. One-third of survey participants felt that “church is boring.” Twenty percent of those who attended as a teenager said that God appeared to be missing from their experience of church.

The study also found many young adults do not like the way churches appear to be against science. Over one-third of young adults said that “Christians are too confident they know all the answers” and one-fourth of them said that “Christianity is anti-science.”


The fifth reason the study gives for such an exodus from churches is many young adults struggle with the exclusivity of Christianity. Twenty-nine percent of young Christians said “churches are afraid of the beliefs of other faiths” and feel they have to choose between their friends and their faith.

The last reason the study gives for young people leaving the church is they feel it is “unfriendly to those who doubt.” Over one-third of young adults said they feel like they can't ask life's most pressing questions in church and 23 percent said they had “significant intellectual doubts” about their faith.

David Kinnaman, Barna Group president and author of the book on these findings, You Lost Me: Why Young Christians are Leaving Church and Rethinking Church, said part of the problem may be that many churches are geared toward “traditional” young adults.

“But most young adults no longer follow the typical path of leaving home, getting and education, finding a job, getting married and having kids – all before the age of 30,” he said. “These life events are being delayed, reordered, and sometimes pushed completely off the radar among today's young adults.”

The Barna Update that highlights this study also says that today's young adults are heavily influenced by the major social, spiritual and technological changes that have occurred in the last quarter century.

Dan Smith, pastor of Momentum Christian Church in Cleveland, Ohio, told The Christian Post in an email that the six points “resonate” with him.

“I feel like part of God's calling on my life is to reach those 85 percent (made-up stat) who want to connect with God ... but don't feel like the typical church is helping with that,” he said.

“Most of our church is made up of 20s, 30s, and 40s – younger people – because our leaders have the same mindset as some of the younger people do – we won't tolerate inauthenicity 'on stage,' trite answers, anti-scientific discussion, etc. As Scripture says, we believe that if Jesus is lifted up, young people should also be drawn to him ... so we try to lift him up in a way they can participate.”

Instead of overreacting to these statistics (by gearing churches specifically toward young people) or remaining indifferent to them, Kinnaman suggests that churches should cultivate “intergenerational relationships” within their congregations.

“In many churches, this means changing the metaphor from simply passing the baton to the next generation to a more functional, biblical picture of a body – that is, the entire community of faith, across the entire lifespan, working together to fulfill God's purposes.”

Soyce:

Study: Why Young Christians Leave the Church
 
May 14, 2014
611
4
0
#36
Originally posted by Percepi
He was referring to different species of animals, which is clear if you read his works. He was not referring to different races of humans, as many dishonest critics of Darwin like to claim.
As Tintin said, humans are animals in Darwins view:

"At some future period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla." ("The Descent Of Man", 1874 pg.178)

So did scientists conclude the earth must be much older than what the Bible says, since Darwin claimed (up to his day), the white race was at the top of the chain?
 
Last edited:
T

Tintin

Guest
#37
Evolution was invented my Satan in a seance and the witch was told to inform charles Darwin he would be a good candidate for the perpetration of the satanic theory that would envelope the world, for satan would give all his evil angels power to hypnotize wherever evolution is taught.
documented fact on internet go search

Evolution is totally backward science...
things do not build themselves in any laboratory and the fact that random production of chemicals produces vastly more poisonous chemicals than good ones ensures evolution is just hypnotic delusion to people who want to believe it.

You can only hypnotize people who VOLUNTEER and want to be hypnotized.
and most people dont want a rigorous religion and will take any excuse to do what they want
satan knows this

but please do not call evolution SCIENCE

for science fundamentally is
REPRODUCIBLE RESULTS in the laboratory...

Evolution has not been demonstrated even one time in any laboraory and trillions and trillions of lifeform reproduce each year always according to species
evolutionists are dense fools who want to die and enjoy themselves while doing it.
I too believe evolution is a lie from the Enemy but the rest of your post is embarrassing and completely misinformed. Evolutionary theory was helped by belief in uniformitarianism. Greek philosophers proposed an entirely naturalistic understanding of how everything came into being. Evolution is just a modern offshoot of this ancient belief that's used to remove God from the equation.
 
Feb 16, 2014
903
2
0
#38
Any scientist worth their salt would realize that something can appear by all accounts to be a certain age and yet it not be so. Instruments only measure what is apparent - not what is real. I have seen 40 year olds that look 70. Analysis of the body would reveal such s thing. And yet witnesses would say, No, definitely 40. I always find it ironic that those who consider their instruments worthy are the same who forget we have designed technology that can accelerate processes. Have you heard of synthetic diamonds? Your instruments will provide an artificial age, not taking into account the artificiality of the process, except that by our standards the conditions were more controlled. If us feeble scientists with our feeble technology can recreate and discern such a process, then why do we deny God's power, in that He created nature a much higher form of technology, and yet it also is cast into the oven.

I will never relate to the lazy scientist that only considers what is directly before him, not taking all things into account.

That being said, using Ellen White as a scare tactic to drive people away from considering a relatively young (in actual time) earth is an excellent easy way to scare those who focus merely on doctrine away from considering all things. But I imagine if they get caught up that simply means yet another lesson, hopefully, it that the wheat is separated from the chaff.

At any rate, I dare a man to say he knows the length of time as we know it. I will show you a man without consideration. God has always been and always will be and I think that matters much more.
Scientists use multiple dating methods to verify the age of their findings. They also study inconsistencies with dating methods so they can better understand why they fail, and therefore when it's appropriate to use them or not.

This is why scientists worth their salt do rely on dating methods. They refer to multiple dating methods and they apply what they know of those dating methods to avoid massive errors. If multiple dating methods point to a similar age, then the scientists can be confident in the results. If the results are not consistent, then they start over.

I too believe evolution is a lie from the Enemy but the rest of your post is embarrassing and completely misinformed. Evolutionary theory was helped by belief in uniformitarianism.
That statement is utter rubbish. You're projecting non-related issues with evolution to affirm your own bias. It's hard for me to tell whether you're truly misinformed, or if you're just plainly dishonest.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#39
...Or maybe I'm telling the truth. I don't expect you, a non-Christian, to believe the same. But evolution is nothing without the millions and billions of years belief found in uniformitarianism.
 
L

Larry_Stotle

Guest
#40
I always preferred the "do you come here often" type of dating meself...