Millions of years ago ! ?

[JackH]

1. I never claimed to be YEC...

Are you YEC?

 

[ivanc0]

So for example, at least in the case of the New Testament, we have literally thousands upon thousands of manuscripts, but "nobody has the slightest idea what the original text said?" I find that difficult to believe. It seems to me that the more manuscripts you have, the more confident you are on what the original text really said. If you only had 1 manuscript labeled "original," how could you ever really be sure that it was really the original?

There's an entire academic field dedicated to this sort of thing.

Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts: Home Page
Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Emanuel Tov: 9780800696641: Amazon.com: Books

I guess if you mean something like, we don't have a hard copy of Paul's letter that he penned himself, then no, we don't have such a thing. We don't have the originals in that sense, but it's a non sequitur to say that we therefore can't know what the originals said (and so 'have' the original words). And why is there a requirement to have a hard copy of the original? Who made this rule?

But the argument still valid "No original to confront copies to", we do not know how many generations of copies before the copies we have has been preserved. all copies we have could came from a single copy 10 generations after the original, we just do not know, what about if the original does not exist at all, and it was just a version attributed to the author and then copied multiple times, there is multiple scenarios were the lack of the original could mean distortion.

 

[kodiak]

Without relying on your YEC interpretation of Genesis . . .

What evidence do you have that animals and humans were created at the same time?

What evidence do you have that dinosaurs and humans coexisted?

I am asking you to answer these questions without saying, "Because God says so."

How else can you interpret genesis 1 other than to say God created the world exactly as it says? I don't see how it is an interpretation. It means exactly what it says.......I still say two contradictory statements cannot both be right....That is pure logic. Do you think two contradictory statements can both be true. Do you believe in subjective truth as opposed to objective truth?

How would ancient humans have been able to describe and even draw pictures of dinosaurs if they had not seen them? Here is an article that you can fact check. Don't take its word, do your own research on all of this.
How do you explain how humans have had stories of dinosaurs before they were even discovered?

 

[ivanc0]

How else can you interpret genesis 1 other than to say God created the world exactly as it says? I don't see how it is an interpretation. It means exactly what it says.......I still say two contradictory statements cannot both be right....That is pure logic. Do you think two contradictory statements can both be true. Do you believe in subjective truth as opposed to objective truth?

How would ancient humans have been able to describe and even draw pictures of dinosaurs if they had not seen them? Here is an article that you can fact check. Don't take its word, do your own research on all of this.
How do you explain how humans have had stories of dinosaurs before they were even discovered?

I have read the full article, and refers to legends, no hard evidence. You can not put your evidence in legends, they probably discovered the bones and with imagination built the animals in their minds. You need to give harder evidence to be taken seriously.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Man has measured the speed of light, and also knows about the Doppler effect that for electromagnetic waves like light is valid, produces a red shift in the spectrum of light, also has measured the distance starts and galaxies are from us, and has concluded that the stars are so far away that the distance for its light to travel space and reach us is measured from the closes start "Proxima centaury" 4.2 light years away to The galaxy MACS0647-JD about 13.3 billion light-years from Earth.

To say that God created the Universe 6000 years ago, goes from fanaticism to Ignorance passing trough adjectives I dear not to mention.

And I have not even mention, evolution, fossil record, embryonic replay, recessive genes, geology, seismology, mantle tectonics, radioactivity, Galapagos island, the volume of water volume in the interior of earth, has to be less that the water in the exterior, water in the interior is very hot and will came out with lot of steam, and if busted in one instantaneous event like young earth theory will steam cook Moses and his ark.....too much to say.

So what your saying is God is not able to create the universe in a way the light shows immediately. He has the power to create stars and planets, galaxies and moons. Land and water, Animals and plants of every kind, but he is powerless to make it so the stars do not shine their lights on the day they are created.

ok. Thanks.. for proving your lack of faith in the power of God.

Evolution has been proven a sham, Fossilsand everythign else you mentioned are easily and more readily explained by a earthwide flood.

Next!

 

[kodiak]

I see what he just said as a false statement.....
Evolution: beings were formed over many years and came from animals
Bible: God created the earth in 6 days and rested on the seventh. He made man, man was not made from animals.....
Billy Graham: "of course I accept the Creation story... I believe that God did create the universe. I believe that God created man, and whether it came by an evolutionary process and at a certain point He took this person or being and made him a living soul or not, does not change the fact that God did create man."

He accepts that God created the earth in 6 days and created man from dust of the earth, not from animals.....yet he believes science that humans came from animals over many years, not 6 days......How can one hold both beliefs? They are contradicting........Are you really saying God, the almighty, was wrong and Human, who is prone to error, is correct?

I was saying the Bible disagrees with evolution, therefore, they can't both be right.....no matter what humans say......if you can't see what I was saying, reread Genesis

How else can you interpret genesis 1 other than to say God created the world exactly as it says? I don't see how it is an interpretation. It means exactly what it says.......I still say two contradictory statements cannot both be right....That is pure logic. Do you think two contradictory statements can both be true. Do you believe in subjective truth as opposed to objective truth?

How do you read Genesis 1? How do you get evolution goes with Genesis 1? You have to choose between God or man, I don't see a possible middle ground, without holding contradictory beliefs.......

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What part of there is no conflict between science and the bible don't you understand?

Young earth creationists blatantly misrepresent science to further their agenda.

In your post above I quoted, you quoted from the judge in Kitzmiller v. Dover who said:

"Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator."

wrong.

The bible does not support an old earth. Unless you do not take scripture at its word.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It appears the YECs are speechless.

Nope. yec's are not concerned with a date. just another strawman.

 

[JackH]

Not only is it a logical fallacy to use an argument from authority, but Billy Graham isn't even considered much of an authority.


If you bother looking around...
you'll find a WHOLE LOT of Christians who disagree with Billy Graham about a WHOLE LOT of things.


Billy Graham may, or may not, be respected by someone as an evangelist...
but he's never been considered a serious theologian.

Definition of theology according to Mirriam-Webster: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience : the study of God and God's relation to the world.

It seems to me that Billy Graham was pretty serious about explaining God's relation to the world such that millions of people have accepted the invitation at his crusades to accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.

Yeah, there are a WHOLE LOT of fundies who disagree with Billy Graham. Especially over his attempts to bridge the gaps between various denominations.

Again, this is what Billy Graham said:

"I don't think that there's any conflict at all between science today and the Scriptures. I think that we have misinterpreted the Scriptures many times and we've tried to make the Scriptures say things they weren't meant to say, I think that we have made a mistake by thinking the Bible is a scientific book. The Bible is not a book of science. The Bible is a book of Redemption, and of course I accept the Creation story. I believe that God did create the universe. I believe that God created man, and whether it came by an evolutionary process and at a certain point He took this person or being and made him a living soul or not, does not change the fact that God did create man. ... whichever way God did it makes no difference as to what man is and man's relationship to God."

You don't think Billy Graham is qualified to speak out on the relation between science and scripture?

Do you think the Pope is?

Who do YOU think is qualified to speak out on the relation between science and Scripture?

Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind)?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I assume, from what else you have said, you mean the fossil evidence is in favor of a young earth, as in around 6,000 years old.

If so, what fossil evidence, exactly, are you talking about?

the fossil evidence created by the great flood. Which proves fossils were made in the matter of a year. not millions of years. which makes no sense. If one considers what is REQUIRED to make a fossil in the first place.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The problem with OEC's is they reject the flood as being global. thus they are required to add thousands and even millions of years to get their science to correlate with what is seen. Where if they would just accept the biblical fact that a major catastrophic flood occured, which wrent the earth in such a way that major things occured. They could easily see that most of what they claimed took thousands or even millions of years to occur, all happened in that time frame. or up to a few centuries after (ie the grand canyon)

 

[kodiak]

Who do YOU think is qualified to speak out on the relation between science and Scripture?

You have yet to say why D. Russel Humphreys cannot...in relation to his biography.....

 

[JackH]

the fossil evidence created by the great flood. Which proves fossils were made in the matter of a year. not millions of years. which makes no sense. If one considers what is REQUIRED to make a fossil in the first place.

What date do you say this great flood occurred?

And upon what evidence is that date based?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What date do you say this great flood occurred?

And upon what evidence is that date based?

does it matter what date? or is it more important to know it happened? Dates do not matter.

and what does that have to do with what I said? That sort of question sounds like your fishing, not looking to see if there is any validity to what I said

 

[JackH]

How do you read Genesis 1? How do you get evolution goes with Genesis 1? You have to choose between God or man, I don't see a possible middle ground, without holding contradictory beliefs.......

Could God have caused evolution to occur?

Could some humans have evolved from a common ancestor while other humans were a special creation by God?

Please answer this question without referring to God or the bible:

Were humans on this earth far longer ago than 6,000 years?

 

[JackH]

You have yet to say why D. Russel Humphreys cannot...in relation to his biography.....

I responded to his biography in my post #407, in which I said:

Sure, this former ICR lackey can argue science.

But not very well, according to:

Flaws in a Young-Earth Cooling Mechanism | NCSE

In which you will note it says:

"For these reasons, we reject Humphreys's cooling mechanism: because it is wrong, it is ineffective, it is falsified by observational data, and it is theologically flawed."

 

[JackH]

does it matter what date? or is it more important to know it happened? Dates do not matter.

and what does that have to do with what I said? That sort of question sounds like your fishing, not looking to see if there is any validity to what I said

It doesn't matter if animals were on earth many millions of years ago?

Or animals were created in 4004 BC according to the date that was printed in the KJV right next to the verse in Genesis 1 for a couple hundred years?

 

[kodiak]

Could God have caused evolution to occur?

Could some humans have evolved from a common ancestor while other humans were a special creation by God?

Please answer this question without referring to God or the bible:

Were humans on this earth far longer ago than 6,000 years?

Is there a reason you are avoiding my question?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Could God have caused evolution to occur?

Could some humans have evolved from a common ancestor while other humans were a special creation by God?

Please answer this question without referring to God or the bible:

Were humans on this earth far longer ago than 6,000 years?

No. No and No

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It doesn't matter if animals were on earth many millions of years ago?

Or animals were created in 4004 BC according to the date that was printed in the KJV right next to the verse in Genesis 1 for a couple hundred years?

Who said animals were on earth that long ago? What is your proof?

Animals and man were created at the same time, And where do you get 4004 BC? What prove do you have of this?