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.
yes, a valid possible objection, that God does not decieve.
imo, it could be countered with the idea that God said how he did it in Genesis, so the only people decieved are those who disregard the writing.
also, God counsels samuel to decieve saul, so maybe God isn't against deception in some cases.
were adam & eve raised as children? or as babies?
is it 'raised' or 'created'... do you believe they were first born to non-human parents?
too, there's Jesus turning water into wine. wine is an 'aged' substance. or, maybe he turned water into wine-flavored liquid, but then that would be somewhat deceptive.
imo, it could be countered with the idea that God said how he did it in Genesis, so the only people decieved are those who disregard the writing.
also, God counsels samuel to decieve saul, so maybe God isn't against deception in some cases.
were adam & eve raised as children? or as babies?
is it 'raised' or 'created'... do you believe they were first born to non-human parents?
too, there's Jesus turning water into wine. wine is an 'aged' substance. or, maybe he turned water into wine-flavored liquid, but then that would be somewhat deceptive.
E
Here is the problem with bowman supposed proof.
If God created the earth "Aged" and created the light from each star no matter how far it is from earth to show its light on the earth (to be a light for the night) then all his so called secular "prove" of an old earth is not proof at all. it would not take light years for all that stuff to happen. God created it like it was already light years.
OEC's do not like to look at the supernatural They reject it.. I giess they deny the power of God to do those things. WHich is sad really.
If God created the earth "Aged" and created the light from each star no matter how far it is from earth to show its light on the earth (to be a light for the night) then all his so called secular "prove" of an old earth is not proof at all. it would not take light years for all that stuff to happen. God created it like it was already light years.
OEC's do not like to look at the supernatural They reject it.. I giess they deny the power of God to do those things. WHich is sad really.
Gen 1 is a sequence showing formation....not appearance of age.
Then again....Samuel is not God...
The Hebrew indicates vast passages of time required in their upbringing, of which, would not be required if they were each fully formed and educated.
Changing liquid from one form to another is hardly deception.
Then again....Samuel is not God...
The Hebrew indicates vast passages of time required in their upbringing, of which, would not be required if they were each fully formed and educated.
Changing liquid from one form to another is hardly deception.
I'm not sure if we're communicating here or not...
"Looking into the heavens is like looking back in time" is valid only if things are the same today as they were back then.
at least I think that's logical.
"The speed of light has always remained constant....and could NOT have ever changed due to E = mc^2"
this would be an excellent example. could the speed of light have changed, but other things changed as well, such that when we observe the data, it appears the speed of light hasn't changed?
"Looking into the heavens is like looking back in time" is valid only if things are the same today as they were back then.
at least I think that's logical.
"The speed of light has always remained constant....and could NOT have ever changed due to E = mc^2"
this would be an excellent example. could the speed of light have changed, but other things changed as well, such that when we observe the data, it appears the speed of light hasn't changed?
I don't think it's incumbent upon the holder of that position to prove the speed of light changed.
imo, it would be like saying to someone else who's a solipsist, "prove to me that nothing exists outside your consciousness."
Peter implies that the statement "all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation" is false, so there is at least some reason to doubt.
imo, it would be like saying to someone else who's a solipsist, "prove to me that nothing exists outside your consciousness."
Peter implies that the statement "all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation" is false, so there is at least some reason to doubt.
Whether that mantra 'flies here' is irrelevant, as I wasn't asserting it. The idea that you can claim to be a Christian, and insult fellow Christians, is not biblically sound. I'm surprised that you again try to change the subject.
Another dodge. Try dealing with what I actually wrote, rather than with your caricature of your assumption of what I believe. You may call me whatever you like, denigrate my views, lump me in with others, and the burden of proof for a constant speed of light is still on you, no matter how many times you dodge it. You made the assertion, you defend it.
Another dodge. Try dealing with what I actually wrote, rather than with your caricature of your assumption of what I believe. You may call me whatever you like, denigrate my views, lump me in with others, and the burden of proof for a constant speed of light is still on you, no matter how many times you dodge it. You made the assertion, you defend it.
E
Nope your wrong again.
If you believed in the supernatural You would not so proudly say YEC have no basis of reality, or hate on us like you do. You would have to humbly admit, we may be right, Maybe God did supernatural do those things, we will not know until we talk to him face to face.
But no, Since you have been here, Your pride on this subject shows itself. Just read the last posts.. Seems like another one sees you for who you are. You have a habit of doing that.
(I'm gonna answer your complete post in several posts. I think this will keep there from being too many ideas in a single post.)
it wouldn't just be Genesis 1, but also the geneologies that are broken down into years, and some passages from other parts of the scriptures.
(Peter says the earth was formed out of water.)
myself, I've never seen both a literal reading of the scriptures and an old earth put together without bending something.
it wouldn't just be Genesis 1, but also the geneologies that are broken down into years, and some passages from other parts of the scriptures.
(Peter says the earth was formed out of water.)
myself, I've never seen both a literal reading of the scriptures and an old earth put together without bending something.