Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'creation'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Worthy Lobby
    • Worthy Welcome
  • Christian Discussions
    • Study Group
    • General Discussion
    • Do you want to just ask a question?
    • Theology
    • Apologetics
    • Prophecy
    • Christian Culture
  • Upper Room
    • Prayer Requests
    • Praises
    • Absolutely Positive!
    • Testimonies
  • Community Center
    • Fellowship Hall
    • Legacy Lounge
    • Humor! Need a good laugh?
    • Golden Oldies
    • Sports, Hobbies, Entertainment, and other interests
  • Videos
    • General
    • Comedy
    • Biblical Topics
    • Christian Music
  • Current News
    • Worthy Briefs
    • Most Interesting News Developments
    • World News
    • Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
    • U.S. News
    • Christian News
  • Worthy Ministries
    • Worthy Devotions
    • What's the latest with the Worthy Ministries?
  • Worthy Fantasy Football League's Discussions
  • Who's on the Lord side?'s Topics
  • Cooking club's What's your favorite recipe?
  • Cooking club's Bread
  • Cooking club's About Multi-cookers - features, tips, recipes
  • Cooking club's Smokers & related recipes/techniques
  • Gardening.'s Gardening Club Forum
  • Photography How To (tips and tricks)'s Photography Club Topics
  • Maker's Club's So, what do you make, what have you made?
  • Maker's Club's Club News
  • Bible 365's THE DAILY READING
  • Bible 365's Misc. Things of interest
  • Bible 365's Bible Topics - Looking at the Bible Topically
  • Reading Club's Topics
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Quizzes
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Index to Bible Trivia and Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Announcements
  • Puzzle Club's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Resources
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's Forums
  • Drone Club's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's 12 Steps and Biblical Comparison
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Testimonies
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Lessons
  • Worthy Book Club's Forums
  • The New Hobbies Club's Discussion board
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Low Carb Eating
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Diabetes
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Encouragement
  • Triumph Over Cancer's General topics
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Tips and advice

Christian Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

  • WCF Events
  • Worthy Fantasy Football League's Calendar of Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 27 results

  1. OK peeps, so many are sad because the weather is cold and dreary, and/or you are stuck inside for one reason or another. Let's post pictures of beautiful, warm, relaxing places and cheer each other up! This one's in Croatia
  2. Daily Reading 1 If you prefer, you can look up the following verses in your own Bible, or by whatever means and in whichever version you choose. (or go to next day) Luke 5:27-39 Genesis 1:1-2:1-25 Psalm 1:1-6 Audio 5:04 Audio 4:55 Audio 0:55 The above verse addresses are linked to Bible Gateway. That is an easy way to read (or listen to) the Bible verses, and choose your version. Personally, I prefer written, that way I can go at my own pace, and think about it, before moving on. Nothing wrong with doing either or both. The Bible says faith comes by hearing. See the picture below to get an idea of what to expect if you follow the above links. Note: The audio will not play the exact verses, it will play the BELOW THIS LINE IS OR OLD FORMAT November 1st, 2017, was our first day of this Bible Club. Below is the original format, we changed format sometime later. Above, is th updated format, I hope to update all the pages as the new year of the club continues. I think these old links below, will still work, but I am not maintaining them. Luke 5:27-39 Genesis 1:1-2:1-25 Genesis 2:1-25 Psalm 1:1-6 If you want to go to the site to see the verses displayed with auto popups of the verse text, then choose one of the versions listed below: King James Version The New King James Version, The New International Version, The New American Standard Bible If you do that, you will be taken to a page that has the same verse addresses shown above. My hovering your cursor over the address there, a popup should display, if your viewing device is comparable. I the verse is short, you may read it all in the popup, if it is too long to fit, then you will need to click where it says "more" to see the rest of the passage.
  3. Yes, this is LONG. No need for you to tell me that, or tell me that no-one will read it. The Fine Tuning of the Universe as Evidence for the Existence of God Bible Reading: Psalm 19:1-14; Revelation 4:1-11. Youtube.com video: “Fine Tuning of the Universe – Reasonable Faith.” Memory Verse. Proverbs 3:19 " The LORD by wisdom has founded the earth; by understanding has he established the heavens. Aim: To consider some proofs for the existence of a Creator God Who intervenes in human affairs. Introduction: Some people think that science and evolution have disproved God. This is a very out-dated idea. The more we learn about the universe and the Bible, the more convinced we become of the existence of an infinitely intelligent designer of the universe. I. Bible Verses Teaching the Greatness of God as the Designer of the Universe “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” Romans 11:33. “Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?” Job 38:33. “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.” Psalm 19:1. “Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: & the heavens are the work of thy hands” Psalm 102:25 “To him that by wisdom made the heavens:” Psalm 136:5. “The LORD by wisdom has founded the earth; by understanding has he established the heavens. Pro 3:19. “When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth” Prov 8:27 “Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;” Isaiah 44:24. “Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens: when I call unto them, they stand up together.” Isaiah 48:13. “He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion.” Jeremiah 10:12. “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” Revelation 4:11. II. The Fine Tuning of the Constants of the Universe From galaxies down to subatomic particles, the very structure of the universe is determined by finely tuned values of physical constants, such as: 1. The Speed of Light. C = 299,792,458 m/second. 2. The Gravitational constant. G = 6.673 x 10‾ ˡˡ m3/kg/sec2 3. Planck’s Constant = 1.0547148 x 10‾34 m²kg/ sec² 4. Planck Mass-Energy = 1.2209 x 10²² MeV 5. Electron mass = 0.511 MeV; Proton mass = 938.3 MeV; Neutron mass = 939.6 MeV. 6. Cosmological constant = (2.3 x 10‾³ eV)‾4 7. Hubble constant = 71 km/sec/Mpc Each of these numbers has been carefully dialled to an astonishingly precise value that falls between an exceedingly narrow, life permitting range. If any one of these numbers were altered by a very small amount, no physical life of any kind could exist anywhere. There would be no stars, no planets, no life, no chemical elements. Consider Gravity. The force of gravity is determined by the gravitational constant “G”. F = Gmm/r² . If this constant “G” varied by 1 part in 10 to the power of 60 parts, none of us would exist. This is 1 part in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. If the Gravitational constant had been out by just 1 of these infinitesimally small increments, the universe would have expanded and thinned out so rapidly that no stars could form and life could not exist, or it would have collapsed back on itself with the same result of no stars, no planets and no life forming. Consider the Expansion rate of the universe. This is driven by the Cosmological constant “lambda” ‘ᴧ’. A change in this constant by 1 part in 10 to the power of 120, would cause the universe to expand too rapidly or too slowly, in either case causing the universe to be life prohibiting. Consider the Mass and Energy of the early universe. If these were not evenly distributed to a precision of 1 part in 10 to the power of 10 with 122 zeroes, the universe would be hostile to life of any kind. 1685 Our universe only permits physical interactive life only because these and many other numbers have been independently and exquisitely balanced on a razor’s edge. “Wherever physicists look, they see examples of fine tuning.” Sir Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal of Great Britain, Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at Cambridge University. “The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.” Stephen Hawking, Theoretical physicist and Cosmologist, Cambridge. “These special features are surprising and unlikely.” David Deutsch, Physicist at Oxford University. Question: What is the best explanation for this astoundingly precise fine tuning of these constants? Answer: The Fine Tuning of the universe is due either to a) Necessity, b) Chance, or c) Design. Which of these is more likely? a) Necessity? These constants are not determined by the laws of nature. There is no reason or evidence to suggest that fine tuning is necessary. b) Chance? No! Is fine tuning of the universal constants a matter of luck? The probabilities are so remote as to put fine tuning beyond the realms of chance. Some guess and imagine a universe generator that produces so many universes that a life permitting universe will one day pop out. There is no scientific evidence for this multiverse. It has not been detected, observed, measured or proved. A universe generator would require an enormous amount of fine tuning. c) Design of these constants and the fine tuning of the universe for life is the best explanation. “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics… and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me to be so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.” Fred Hoyle. “It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the universe. The impression of design is overwhelming.’ Paul Davies, Physicist, winner of Templeton Prize, Faraday Prize, Kelvin Medal. “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork; Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.” Psalm 19:1,2. III. Other Examples of Fine Tuned Constants that are Exactly Life- Permitting. Evidence shows that the constants of physics have been finely tuned to a degree not possible by accident. What is the probability of all of these constants being exactly right? Evolution had nothing to do with this. 1. Strong nuclear force constant if larger: no hydrogen would form; if smaller: no elements heavier than hydrogen would form. 2. Weak nuclear force constant if larger: too much hydrogen would convert to helium in big bang; if smaller: too little helium would be produced from “big bang”. 3. Gravitational force constant if larger: stars would be too hot and would burn too rapidly and too unevenly for life chemistry. if smaller: stars would be too cool to ignite nuclear fusion; thus, many of the elements needed for life chemistry would never form. 4. Electromagnetic force constant if greater: chemical bonding would be disrupted; elements more massive than boron would be unstable to fission if lesser: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry 5. Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant if larger: all stars would be at least 40% more massive than the sun; hence, stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven for life support. if smaller: all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun, thus incapable of producing heavy elements. 6. Ratio of electron to proton mass if larger: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry if smaller: same as above 7. Polarity of the water molecule if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too high for life if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too low for life; liquid water would not work as a solvent for life chemistry; ice would not float, and a runaway freeze-up would result 8. Mass of the neutrino. if smaller: galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars would not form. if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense IV. Uniqueness of the Galaxy-Sun-Earth-Moon System for Life Support 1. Parent star distance from center of galaxy (9) (p = 0.2) if greater: insufficient heavy elements would be available for rocky planet formation if lesser: radiation would be too intense for life; stellar density would disturb planetary orbits, making life impossible 2. Parent star distance from closest spiral arm (9) (p = 0.1) if too small: radiation from other stars would be too intense and the stellar density would disturb orbits of life-supportable planets if too great: quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient for formation of life-supportable planets 3. Number of stars in the planetary system (10) (p = 0.2) if more than one: tidal interactions would make the orbits of life-supportable planets too unstable for life if fewer than one: no heat source would be available for life chemistry 4. Parent star mass (10) (p = 0.001) if greater: star's luminosity would be too erratic and star would burn up too quickly to support life if lesser: life support zone would be too narrow; rotation period of life-supportable planet would be too long; UV radiation would be insufficient for photosynthesis 5. Parent star metallicity (9) (p = 0.05) if too little: insufficient heavy elements for life chemistry would exist if too great: radioactivity would be too intense for life; heavy element concentrations would be poisonous to life 6. Parent star color (9) (p = 0.4) if redder: photosynthetic response would be insufficient to sustain life if bluer: same result 7. H3+ production (23) (p = 0.1) if too little: simple molecules essential to planet formation and life chemistry would never form if too great: planets would form at the wrong time and place for life 8. Parent star luminosity (11) (p = 0.0001) if increases too soon: runaway green house effect would develop if increases too late: runaway glaciation would develop 9. Surface gravity (governs escape velocity) (12) (p = 0.001) if stronger: planet's atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane for life if weaker: planet's atmosphere would lose too much water for life 10. Distance of earth from parent star (13) (p = 0.001) if greater: planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle if lesser: planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle 11. Orbital eccentricity (p = 0.3) if too great: seasonal temperature range would be too extreme for life 12. Axial tilt (9) (p = 0.3) if greater: surface temperature differences would be too great to sustain diverse life-forms. if lesser: same result 13. Rotation period (11) (p = 0.1) if longer: diurnal temperature differences would be too great for life if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would be too great for life 14. Magnetic field (20) (p = 0.01) if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe if weaker: planetary surface & ozone layer would be inadequately protected from hard solar & stellar radiation 15. Thickness of crust (15) (p = 0.01) if greater: crust would rob atmosphere of oxygen needed for life if lesser: volcanic and tectonic activity would be destructive to life 16. Albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface) (9) (p = 0.1) if greater: runaway glaciation would develop. if less: runaway greenhouse effect would develop 17. Asteroid and comet collision rates (9) (p = 0.1) if greater: ecosystem balances would be destroyed if less: crust would contain too little of certain life-essential elements 1687 18. Oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere (25) (p = 0.1) if greater: advanced life functions would proceed too rapidly if lesser: advanced life functions would proceed too slowly 19. Carbon dioxide level in atmosphere (21) (p = 0.01) if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop if less: plants would be unable to maintain efficient photosynthesis 20. Water vapor quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01) if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop if less: rainfall would be too meager for advanced land life 21. Ozone quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01) if greater: surface temperatures would be too low for life; insufficient UV radiation for life if less: surface temperatures would be too high for life; UV radiation would be too intense for life 22. Oxygen quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.01) if greater: plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily, destabilizing Earth's ecosystem if less: advanced animals would have too little to breathe 23. Seismic activity (16) (p = 0.1) if greater: life would be destroyed; ecosystem would be damaged if less: nutrients on ocean floors from river runoff would not be recycled to continents through tectonics; not enough carbon dioxide would be released from carbonate buildup 24. Volcanic activity (26) if lower: insufficient amounts of carbon dioxide and water vapor would be returned to the atmosphere; soil mineralization would be insufficient for advanced life support if higher: advanced life would be destroyed; ecosystem would be damaged 25. Soil mineralization (9) (p = 0.1). if nutrient poorer or if nutrient richer : diversity & complexity of lifeforms would be limited: same result 26. Gravitational interaction with a moon (17) (p = 0.1) if greater: tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe for life if lesser: orbital obliquity changes would cause climatic instabilities; movement of nutrients and life from the oceans to the continents and vice versa would be insufficient for life; magnetic field would be too weak to protect life from dangerous radiation. Size, distance and number of moons are right. 27. Jupiter distance (18) (p = 0.1) if greater: Jupiter would be unable to protect Earth from frequent asteroid and comet collisions if lesser: Jupiter's gravity would destabilize Earth's orbit 28. Jupiter mass (19) (p = 0.1) if greater: Jupiter's gravity would destabilize Earth's orbit if lesser: Jupiter would be unable to protect Earth from asteroid and comet collisions 29. Atmospheric pressure (9) (p = 0.1) if smaller: liquid water would evaporate too easily and condense too infrequently to support life if greater: inadequate liquid water evaporation to support life; insufficient sunlight would reach Earth's surface; insufficient UV radiation would reach Earth's surface 30. Atmospheric transparency (9) (p = 0.01) if greater: too broad a range of solar radiation wavelengths would reach Earth's surface for life support if lesser: too narrow a range of solar radiation wavelengths would reach Earth's surface for life support 31. Chlorine quantity in atmosphere (9) (p = 0.1) if greater: erosion rate and river, lake, and soil acidity would be too high for most life forms; metabolic rates would be too high for most life forms if lesser: erosion rate and river, lake, and soil acidity would be too low for most life forms; metabolic rates would be too low for most life forms 32. Iron quantity in oceans and soils (9) (p = 0.1). if greater: iron poisoning would destroy advanced life if lesser: food to support advanced life would be insufficient. if very small: no life would be possible 33. Quantity of soil sulfur (9) (p = 0.1). if lesser: plants would die from protein deficiency. if greater: plants would be destroyed by sulfur toxins, soil acidity, and disturbance of the nitrogen cycle Taken from Big Bang Refined by Fire by Dr. Hugh Ross, 1998. Reasons To Believe, Pasadena, CA
  4. Godmorning to you all, I’ve been wondering a lot about the creation and life of dinosaurs seen from a Christian perspective. Is it possible that they never actually existed and that it’s a trick played on us by NASA, just like the earth is round theory? Or did God actually create these creatures on the 6th day? It just seems unnatural to me, that dinosaurs would have roamed the earth at the same time as Adam and Eve, but since God is almighty, would he have been able to create a hole in time and space and simply add these glorious creatures to a time before existence? I’m really looking forward to a nice discussion and some truthful answers, so please keep it light. Have a wonderful day!
  5. Today I praise God for providing two gorgeous spring days in a row. Three days ago it was 30 degrees F, and while driving, I wished it would get warm and stay warm. Yesterday and today it's been 78 degrees and breezy. Hurray!! I've had my windows open to let the stale air out and the fresh air in. It's heavenly. Praise the God of all Creation for giving us even the little things in life!
  6. Praise the Lord, hallelujah! Praise You, God, for your purity and perfection! Praise You Lord, Jesus Christ, for saving me and my testimony! Glory be to You, God, our Father who art in Heaven! Thanks be to the Holy Spirit's comfort, teaching and guidance! All we know, understand, experience and struggle with is for your glory, perfect plan and unquestionable will. I shall not want or crave anything outside of Jesus Christ's way. Let me know if so, let me understand what You want for us is best. May I pick up and carry my own cross, denying myself for You. I worship You as all knowing, powerful and gracious. May I draw closer to You and keep You as top priority in my family's lives. You are first, my family is second and I am here to serve. May I serve you reverently, fully and completely. May there be less of me and more of Jesus Christ instead. Jesus, You are thee only way, light and salvation. All I need is You. God, You take care of the rest. You are in control, God, making and letting everything happen. I am in awe and wonder of your creation. I am eternally grateful, worshipping You and your Son for thee ultimate sacrifice and act of love. This body is your temple, use it as You will. Bend me from my will to yours. It is all about You, everything concerns and relates to You! Yours is the kingdom, the power and the glory, forever and ever, in Jesus Christ's name, amen! Sincerely yours, GregoryB
  7. God speaks to us through His word. According to Randy Mann, "Paul tells us that God is the divine author of the all the Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16). Scripture is God's revelation of Himself and His plan of redemption, which He accomplishes through Jesus Christ (Luke 24:25-27)." In Psalm 19 it says: "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork." Also, I like this statement found in Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 1: "Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church; and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased." Sources: https://www.lifeway.com/en/articles/sermon-god-speaks-through-his-word-psalm-19 http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/
  8. There are a couple of great recent Christian movies available that deal with apologetics. One is called The Case For Christ and the other is God's Not Dead One. Both of them do wonderful job of presenting arguments for God, the Bible, historical evidence, etc. Here is the website link for the God's Not Dead movie: God's Not Dead
  9. There is a great creation science magazine you can receive free of charge from the Institute for Creation Institute. Here is there website link for more information: Institute for Creation Research
  10. Why Creation Is Right and Evolution Is Wrong. 1. God said "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. So GOD CREATED MAN in his own image..." Genesis 1:27. 2. JESUS said that God created man: "From the beginning of creation God made them male and female." Mark 10:6. "For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be." Mark 13:19. 3. SUDDEN APPEARANCE of complex life in early Cambrian fossil layers. 4. MAN'S RECORDED HISTORY only goes back to about 3,000 BC, the first dynasty of Egypt and China, agreeing with the Bible's flood date of 2418 BC. 5. SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS says that systems go from order to disorder, yet evolution contradicts this by claiming systems go from "disorder to order". 6. DATING METHODS are greatly in error, giving an apparent age greater than the true age. This is due to unproven assumptions in the dating methods. 7. 220 EVIDENCES for a young earth of about 6,000 years old. 8. ABSENCE OF TRANSITIONAL fossil forms between species as predicted by evolution. 9. Misplaced fossils. For example: i) Human shoe print on trilobite fossil. ii) Cave painting of brontosaurus in Zimbabwe. iii) Polystrate tree trunks over many strata layers. iv) Human and Dinosaur footprints in Turkmenia. 10. No beneficial mutations have given a new species. There is no way to change the number of chromosomes in all the cells of an organism to change it to another species. For example, man has 46 chromosomes in every cell. 11. Complexity of sexual reproduction and eyes, can’t be explained by evolution’s random processes. 12. Bad social effects of evolution a) "Survival of the fittest" of evolution justifies cunning, deceit, cruelty, animal behaviour and massacres, instead of God's law of love and service. b) Militarism of Germany starting World War I and World War II came from them applying evolution to encourage survival of the “fittest” nation Germany. This allowed the massacre of 6 million Jews and the destruction of other countries. This was just an evolutionary conflict. c) Spread of atheism. d) Spread of Communism and the arms race. e) Spread of immorality and divorce. People acting like animals is just evolutionary behaviour. f) No idea of right or wrong because there is no authority of God to be accountable to. g) Abortion. Evolutionists say, “Don't worry, the foetus is only in the fish stage.”
  11. YOUNG EARTH EVIDENCE Astronomical Records. Because of the rarity of solar eclipses at any given location, and because astronomers can date every solar eclipse going back thousands of years, when an ancient tablet or manuscript mentions a solar eclipse, we can accurately date that record, and other events associated with it in other countries. Before 2250 BC, we have no records of any solar eclipse being seen by man. “The earliest Chinese date which can be assigned with any probability is 2250 BC, based on an astronomical reference in the Book of History”. (Ralph Linten, The Tree of Culture (1955), p 520). Writing. The oldest writing is a Sumerian pictograph written on clay tablets dated about 3500 BC. Iron Pot in Coal. Professor W. Rusch has reported an iron pot encased in coal dated by evolutionary standards at 300 million years old. (Creation Research Quarterly (March, 1971) p.201). The pictured affidavit reads as follows: Sulphur Springs, Arkansas, November 27, 1948. While I was working in the Municipal Electric Plant in Thomas, Okla. in 1912, I came upon a solid chunk of coal which was too large to use. I broke it with a sledge hammer. This iron pot fell from the center, leaving the impression or mold of the pot in the piece of coal. Jim Stall (an employee of the company) witnessed the breaking of the coal, and saw the pot fall out. I traced the source of the coal, and found that it came from the Wilburton, Oklahoma Mines. Frank J. Kenwood Sworn to before me, in Sulphur Springs, Arkansas this 27th day of November, 1948. Julia L (?) Metal Bowl. An intricately carved metal bowl was blasted out of solid pudding stone. (Scientific American, June 5, 1852). The Nampa Image is a baked clay figure obtained from a well being bored in 1889 at Nampa, Idaho. It was pumped from rocks 300 feet deep under a “Tertiary” lava sheet (12 million years old.) The problem for evolutionists is how can a man made clay figure 12 million years old (supposedly) have been laid down before man evolved 3 million years ago (supposedly)? Source: American Geologist, F.Wright, 23 (1899), p.267. Pollen in Pre-Cambrian Strata. Pollen from Angiosperm and Gymnosperm trees (woody plants supposedly 260 million years old have been found in Pre Cambrian Hakati shale in the Grand Canyon (supposedly 570 million years old). The problem here for evolutionists is conifer pollen existing 300 million years before it appeared on earth. Some spores are stained with red oxide from surrounding rocks, thus proving that the spores are not from present day contamination. Source: Nature, R. Stainforth, 210 (1966) p.292. Turkmenia. Notice this report in the Sydney Morning Herald, 21 Nov. 1983, “A report from the Soviet news agency, Tass, says that about 1500 tracks made by dinosaurs have been found in Turkmenia – but among those prints are those resembling the footprints of a man. According to Professor Amanniyazov, director of Turkmenia’s Institute of Geology: “If further analysis proves that the prints have been left by anthropoids, the history of mankind will be extended to 150 million, not 5 millionyears.”” Why did Professor Amanniyazov assume dinosaur extinction 150 million years ago as absolutely certainty? Why did he not consider the alternative position of dinosaurs living with man recently? The fact that dinosaur and human footprints have been found in the same rock strata proves that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. This is a great problem to evolutionists who believe that dinosaurs became extinct 70 million years ago. Evolutionists claim that dinosaurs died out 67 million years before man appeared. These footprints prove that: a) Man and dinosaur lived at the same time, and b) The evolutionary geological column is completely wrong in its dating of rocks. The evidence for these tracks being genuine are: i) The tracks of man and dinosaur are widely distributed from Turkestan to Texas. ii) The tracks are mostly exposed by bulldozers or erosion. iii) Two Palaeontologists have pronounced them genuine: - Dr. Camp of the University of California, and - Dr. G. Westcott of Ypsilanti, Michigan. iv) The associated dinosaur tracks are accepted as valid. v) Some prints have ridges of mud pushed up around them. vi) Upon sawing through the footprints, the rock particles underneath are more compressed than particles surrounding the prints. Source: “Scientific American”, A.G. Ingalls: “The Carboniferous Mystery” 162 (1940), page 14. See R.L. Wysong “The Creation-Evolution Controversy”, p.373 Polystrate Trees. Crossing several rock strata are trees preserved as well at their tops as at their bottoms. These fossil trees bridge an evolutionary imagined time span of millions of years, that would preclude their “in place” growth and fossilisation. Galaxy star clusters (spirals with billions of stars) move so rapidly that they would not stay together if the universe were very old. Large Stars. Some stars are so large that they radiate energy 10,000 to 1 million times more rapidly than our sun. They could not have contained enough hydrogen to radiate this fast for millions of years, because their initial mass would have been too big. These O and B class stars, and P Cygni stars could not continue atomic fusion longer than 50,000 to 300,000 years. Abundant Hydrogen in stars. Hydrogen in stars is continually being converted into Helium. Hydrogen cannot be made from other elements. Fred Hoyle states that, if the universe were as old as Big Bang theorists think, then there would be little hydrogen left, as it would be converted to Helium by now. Spectra from stars reveal abundant hydrogen in stars.This implies a young universe. Solar shrinking. Since 1836, over 100 different observers at the Greenwich Observatory and US Naval Observatory have measured the sun’s diameter to shrink at 0.1% per century or 5 feet per hour. At this rate, 50,000 years ago the sun would have been so large as to boil earth’s oceans, making life on earth impossible. 100,000 years ago our sun would have been twice as large. Comets elliptically orbit the sun and are thought to be as old as the sun. As comets orbit the sun, they lose some of their water and gases from the sun’s heat, gravity and tail formation. The tail consists of material driven away from its head by solar energy. Some comets regularly seen in the 19th Century have broken up and vanished, or plunged into the sun. All comets should self-destruct in a short ime, less than 10,000 years. There should be no comets left. Evolution cannot explain comets in an old solar system. Comets are young objects created in a young solar system. Meteoroids bombarding Saturn’s rings would have destroyed them in less than 10,000 years. (W T Brown, In the Beginning, p 18). Jupiter’s Moons. If they evolved, they should be physically alike, having the same amount of volcanoes and impact craters, but this is not so. Evolution claims that all planets were molten 5 billion years ago and volcanic activity stopped 4 billion years ago as they cooled. The moons Ganymede and Callisto have no volcanoes and many impact craters. Europa has no volcanoes and no impact craters. Io has 7 active volcanoes and no impact craters. Titan has volcanoes. Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune (4) have rings, which could not survive 4 billion years. Jupiter’s intense magnetic field radiation would sweep out its rings. (Bradford Smith, a Voyager Scientist). Venus’ high temperature and little erosion, imply a young age for Venus. If Venus was 4 billion years old, its dense atmosphere should have worn away its craters. Mars has little erosion and some water. Mars has many sharp edged craters and volcanoes, as well as month-long dust storms. Several thousand years of this weather would have seriously eroded these edges and its strong colour differences. Powerful solar UV radiation would have long ago broken down the small amount of water, releasing the oxygen into the atmosphere and hydrogen into space. Evolution predicts no surface water and much atmospheric oxygen, but measurements show the opposite being some surface water and very little atmospheric oxygen. Lunar Recession. Due to tidal friction, the moon is moving away from earth at about 4 cm per year (1 ½ inches). At this rate, 5 billion years ago the moon would have been 200,000km. closer. Meteorite Craters only occur on the earth’s surface, never being found in the rock strata. If earth were 5 billion years old, we would find many meteorite craters in the sedimentary rock strata, but we don’t. Thus all meteorites which have struck the earth, have hit it in the last 5000 years. Oil Well Pressure. When oil drillers first penetrate oil wells, oil gushes out because the oil and gas are under great pressure from surrounding rocks. Sedimentary rocks surrounding the oil wells are porous. Studies of these show that the oil would seep out before 100,000 years, but this has not happened. This great oil pressure argues strongly against millions of years age for oil wells, and implies an age for oil of around 10,000 years. Oil, coal and gas were formed during the Great Flood 4,400 years ago (in 2418BC). Earth’s Molten Interior. Deep within the earth, the rocks are molten. The earth is slowly cooling from the surface inwards according to Stefan’s Law of Radiation. Lord Kelvin in 1889 calculated that the earth could not be billions of years old because of earth’s known rate of cooling, the existing temperature gradient in the earth, and the assumption that the earth could not have been hotter than “white hot” initially.“Popular Lectures and Addresses”(London: MacMillan, 1889, p.415). If earth were billions of years old, it would have cooled far more than it now has, even if we assume a radioactively generated heating mechanism. (W T Brown, In the Beginning, p 17). Radiohaloes are colour rings around microscopic radioactive minerals in rock crystals. “Squashed” Polonium-210 radiohaloes indicate that Jurassic, Triassic and Eocene formations in the Colorado Plateau were deposited within months of one another, not from 225-255 million years apart, as evolution claims. “Orphan” Polonium-218 radiohaloes, having no evidence of their mother elements,imply either instant creation, or drastic changes in radioactive decay rates Ocean sediment. There is not enough sediment on the sea floors for earth to be 5 billion years old. Rivers add about 28 billion tons of sediment to the oceans each year. If this had occurred for 1 billion years, the continents would have eroded away many times. There would be a layer of sediment on the ocean floor at least 60 miles thick. However, the average depth of sediment on the ocean floor is about 800 metres, and the continents have not eroded once yet. The Tasman Sea off Australia is not part of a subduction zone of ocean floor being pushed deep into the earth. Subduction zones could not dispose of 10% of incoming sediment. Hence, sea floors seem young. Tree Rings. The oldest living things are Bristlecone pines growing in Eastern Nevada, aged about 4,600 years old (sometimes producing 2 growth rings per year, so their age would be less), and Sequoia Gigantea in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, which are never older than about 4,000 years. These giant redwoods have no known enemies, and never have any dead trees among them. Unless man cuts them down, they never seem to die. 17 Bristlecone pines are dated about 4,000 years old. Since the Flood occurred about 2,418 BC, this implies that: a) all the pre-Flood Sequoias and Bristlecones were wiped out by the Flood, and b) there is no record of any living tree older than the Flood. Man’s Recorded History.If man has lived on earth for 1 million years, why do we only find human records going back to about 3500 BC? This cuneiform tablet is the oldest human writing from Sumeria. When human records first appear, they show man to be highly developed with a sophisticated civilisation. This agrees better with a creation date of 4074 BC than with evolution’s 1 million year history of man. Why did man do nothing for 1 million years? Because he has only been here for 6,000 years.  reprinted with permission from Pastor Keith Piper. https://www.libertybaptistchurch.org.au/
  12. Evidence for creation in 6 days around 7,000 years ago. reprinted with permission from Pastor Keith Piper. https://www.libertybaptistchurch.org.au/ 92._EVIDENCE_FOR_CREATION_in_6_DAYS_in_4074_BC.pdf
  13. If evolution is true, how do you explain polystrata fossils? These are WHOLE fossilized trees crossing several rock strata. These fossil trees bridge an evolutionary-imagined time span of millions of years.
  14. A collection of some of the Proofs of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Bible 🎉 💓 ✝️ 💓 🎉 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *******Please go to YouTube and search for "Proofs of God, Christ, and the Bible Playlist" to find a playlist of 78 videos and growing of proofs of God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Bible!******* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Enjoy the written articles, here! Scientific The scientific evidence against spanking, timeouts, and sleep training http://qz.com/310622/the-scientific-evidence-against-spanking-timeouts-and-sleep-training/ Young Earth Science http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth#20110326 101 evidences for a young age of the Earth and the universe http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/101_evidences_for_a_young_age_of_the_Earth_and_the_universe Ten Reasons Why Sex Should Wait Until Marriage http://www.unification.net/tfv/tenreasons.html Archaeological Biblical Archaeology: Factual Evidence to Support the Historicity of the Bible http://www.equip.org/article/biblical-archaeology-factual-evidence-to-support-the-historicity-of-the-bible/ Ten Top Biblical Archaeology Discoveries http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/free-ebooks/ten-top-biblical-archaeology-discoveries/ Archaeology and the Bible http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html Does Archaeology Support the Bible? https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/does-archaeology-support-the-bible/ Archaeology and the Bible http://www.alwaysbeready.com/archaeological-evidence-for-the-bible Archeological Evidence http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm 50 People in the Bible Confirmed Archaeologically! http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/ Archaeological proof of the Exodus from Egypt (Not an affiliate) http://www.patternsofevidence.com/ History Institute Creation Research “The Bible has proven to be more historically and archaeologically accurate than any other ancient book. It has been subjected to the minutest scientific textual analysis possible to humanity and has been proven to be authentic in every way.” http://www.icr.org/biblical-record History Of The Bible http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/history-of-the-bible.htm Health Health Benefits of Fasting! (Cleansing not recommended) http://www.santosaphuket.com/fasting-water-vs-dry/ These Identical Twins Prove That Smoking Ages You http://guff.com/these-identical-twins-prove-that-smoking-ages-you/501 Nature / The Universe The Fibonacci Sequence Represented in the Universe, Plants, Animals, the Human Body, and more! https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10100518867557259&type=1&l=4e3a6843cd Beauty in every grain: For the first time remarkable photographs reveal hidden charms of ordinary SAND http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2011471/Pictures-sand-Close-photographs-reveal-incredible-beauty.html 26 Pictures Will Make You Re-Evaluate Your Entire Existence http://zumfeed.com/space/1222-26-pictures-will-make-you-re-evaluate-your-entire-existence.html Medical Science Proof We Can Think With Our <3 Hearts <3 Like the Bible has Made Clear! http://www.naturalnews.com/028537_organ_transplants_memories.html The Most Powerful Natural Antibiotic Ever – Kills Any Infections in The Body http://www.getholistichealth.com/41297/the-most-powerful-natural-antibiotic-ever-kills-any-infections-in-the-body/ Lemon is allegedly 10,000 stronger than chemotherapy in killing cancer cells! http://www.getholistichealth.com/42611/heres-why-you-should-always-freeze-your-lemons/ New Study Links GMOs To Cancer, Liver/Kidney Damage & Severe Hormonal Disruption http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/07/15/new-study-links-gmos-to-cancer-liverkidney-damage-severe-hormonal-disruption/ How Negative Thoughts and Emotions Harm Your Body http://steptohealth.com/negative-thoughts-emotions-harm-body/ The Dangers of Synthetic Foods http://3harmfulfoods.com/?v15=1&rc=1 Astronomy New Astronomical Proofs for the Existence of God http://www.reasons.org/articles/new-astronomical-proofs-for-the-existence-of-god The Bible and Astronomy http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/is-the-bible-true/the-bible-and-astronomy
  15. Please notice, that I put this in the comedy section. The reason for that is that I found it more humorous, than I found compelling. It is a man lecturing on origins, and whoever made this video, put together snippets from an opposite viewpoint, to make the opposition look stupid. I do not find that to be an intellectually honest method, to debate people from soundbites, and not allow them to speak for themselves. We do not see the context, so this is not a fair fight at all. The creationist here, is made to look like a bully, though he did not make the video. Also, notice that this is an old video, pretty dated. Why all of this info in an introduction? Well, I am just hoping people will watch it for the humor, and not turn this into a debate thread that belongs in another section of the forum. Now I know, it is pointless to expect that people will resist, and exercise some self control, there are always people who have to be heard, have to make sure that others know their opinion, at least that is my take from having reads thousands of threads here. Having said that, I am not going to try to keep this thread focused on any particular direction, in fact, it might not even be a discussion thread. I am just presenting this for entertainment value, and walking away unless it 'evolves' into something that must be dealt with. Enjoy! http://youtu.be/3YcGXZD2jmY <-Low quality, but short version High quality long version below.
  16. Science, creation, and truth. We need to reason together, and come to a sound conclusion. I would like to have a discussion about why creation is the truth, while evolution is a lie that must be stopped. As I said in another post, it is a poison and our youth is its victim. Please, let us have a rational debate, and come to a truthful resolution... While I have studied evo vs creation for nearly 10 years, I am by no means an expert in all fields. With that being said, I do know a thing or two about what is going on. I am neither right wing, nor left wing, and I most certainly am not politically correct. I am not racist, and I have no agenda. (Creationists like myself are now called racist because we do not agree with evolutionists, and other...(just type into your browser, 'are creationists racist'?)) I simply see with my eyes, smell with my nose, hear with my ears, taste with my mouth, and feel with my hands. Anything said to me beyond this is your opinion, and one that should be kept to yourself. This is for anyone who wants to know more about evo vs creation.
  17. Interesting factoid: I was reading that one gram of DNA, can theoretically store 455 exabytes of information, the equivalent of over 8,403,726 times as much information as was contained in all of the books ever written, as of 2006. I was doing further research on this and found a different statistic, it said that one gram of DNA can only hold a little more than 700 terabytes of data. For a monent there, I was almost impressed at the efficiency of cosmic accidents! Of course, as impressive as the storage capacity of DNA is, DNA in life forms, whether human or in a lowly, single celled bacterium, is just a storage medium. Apart from information, it is like an empty hard drive in a computer (except that it is a small part of something larger which is already microcsopic, and it holds a lot more data than a hard drive). An empty hard drive is as useful as a paperweight, a DNA molecule cannot be used as a paperweight. For a hard drive (or a DNA molecule) to be useful, it has to have information written on it. Hard drives have information on them because we, as intelligent beings, have put information there. However, in order for us to do that, we need other intelligently designed mechanisms, to put the information in there. Computer programs do not exist, without computer programmers. Now, to be sure, those hard drives do not pop into existence, by themselves, they are manufactured by machinery that makes each individual part of the hard drive, and there is other machinery, that assembles all of the parts, assisted of course, by humans who are intelligent enough, to make the tools necessary to handle and assemble the hard drives. The machinery that makes and assembles the hard drive parts, is controlled by the information contained on (you guessed it) other hard drives, which have information on them, programmed by intelligent programmmers. Wouldn't be amazing, that if a long time ago, there was nothing. Then in the middle of nothing, something came to exist. Since there was previously nothing, then the existence of something, happened with out a cause, since there was nothing to cause it. After some more time, this something that now existed, became other stuff that came to be, different kinds of stuff. Then for a long time, this newer stuff, became even more stuff, and continued to change. Then of course, as amazing as this was, some of this stuff began to live. Here is the fun part: In order for something like that to survive, it needed to have a way to store information, we call this DNA. The DNA though, is just the information storage medium, like the magnetic platters inside the hard drive, that store information that a computer needs and uses. So, this DNA not only came into existence, in came into existence, with a set of blueprints, that describe how the life form that this DNA existed in, was to be built. All the information needed to describe all the parts that the life form needed, to extract energy (food) from it's environment. were already in place in the DNA molecule. It also needed a mechanism, a life form, which would host the DNA, a mechanism that could flawlessly copy the DNA and replicate itself. Without this life form, the DNA molecule would just be non-functional matter. So, of course, this means the the DNA molecule, had to exist, with a program intact, in a functional cell, at the same time and place, or subsequent life and DNA would not continue. In other words, nothing, with enough time, became life, with the ability to make copies of itself and to survive in it's enviroment. All of this happened uncaused without any intelligent designer, and yet, at the same time, this simple life form, with nothing to assist it, became more and more complex, until one day, more sophisticated lifeforms would exist, who can read this page. Yet, for all of the intellence that these later life forms posess, they cannot yet, explain nor understand how all of this really worked, they just know, that somehow, it did. Personally, I think there are two perfectly good explanations how this might have all, come to pass. The first explanation, we can call "magic without a magician", or the "big bang / evolution model". The second explanation, we just call God. Related: http://www.omegazine.com/blog/funwithnumbers.html
  18. Origins - Evidence For a Young World O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 1 Timothy 6:20 http://youtu.be/tX9eDTNfQHY But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. 2 Corinthians 4:3-5 http://youtu.be/Z43s4tx9CxM And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Ephesians 3:9
  19. I am going to show you exactly WHY I believe Genesis chapter 1 is a LITERAL PART of the history of life on earth. I believe in what is known as "Old Earth Creation", or OEC, in theological circles. This is pretty much the opposite of a YEC or young earth creationist. The OEC doctrines can be easily traced back over 2000 years. In the OEC belief it is widely held that the "days" of creation are also better translated as "AGES", which is backed by the fact that the word translated "day", when we see in the translation "the first day" "the 2nd day" etc., is also just as properly translated as AGE. These ages can represent very long time periods. The most extensive time period most likely between the Genesis 1:1, and Genesis 1:2. We propose a wide gap of time between the 2 verses hence the name of this thought is "Gap Theory". So between verse 1, When God creates the heavens and earth, and verse 2, we are talking an extremely long and yet undetermined about of time. My THEORY regarding Genesis 1 is this: To put this in the simplest form, Genesis 1:1 initially mentions the creation of everything. From verse 2 and to the end of the chapter, Genesis 1 gves us a description of an "Extinction Event" unfolding before us, and then it also goes on to describe the subsequent healing of the earth and the rebounding of life on earth. Cycles of life and extinction are in fact verified in scripture, just as they are verified in stone. We see it here in Genesis 1, Jeremiah 4, Ecclesiastes, Revelation, and certainly implications are made elsewhere. Ecclesiastes 1 9 What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. 10 Is there anything of which one can say, “Look! This is something new”? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. 11 No one remembers the former generations, and even those yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow them. Revelation ends with the destruction of this current civilization/age and then the subsequent healing of the earth once more for another cycle of life, just as it began in Genesis 1: Quote: Rev. 21:1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. So the bible declares we do indeed have cycles of life and death upon the earth. Today, people in the OEC movement believe this very thing. This OEC belief, as previously stated, can be traced back over 2000 years, and we believe it is the original intent in the earliest manuscripts. I am in very good company with SO many PHD's in various fields related to the subject . Genesis is one of the most poetic books in all of scripture and is valued as extremely sacred by more than one religion. I suggest that this is for good reason. It actually shows creation, then extinction, and then finally the restoration of life on earth... it shows both EVOLUTION and special creation. A theory makes predictions that are TESTABLE... Is MY theory testable? Yes it is and it HAS been REPEATEDLY tested every time we find a fossil. And it PASSES those tests with flying colors whereas Darwin fails. If this theory regarding the literal nature of Genesis 1 is to be tested, then MUCH of the testing of this theory has already been done for the last 150 years or more... through geology, archeology, as well as the fossil record. All we need do to test this theory is to compare it to all these records that have literally been written in stone and CANNOT be changed. We will test the theory against these findings right here in this thread. To summarize, I believe Genesis 1 gives us an HISTORICAL ACCOUNT of an extinction event upon the earth, similar to the one we see with the asteroid impact at the Yucatan peninsula. I believe it further details the subsequent healing of the earth, and the re-establishment of life on earth. To outline this belief and show it unfolds in Genesis 1, you can refer to this. 1) A proper translation of the Hebrew in Genesis 1, 1 and 2, says this: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth BECAME decimated and laid waste." ...The verbiage of Genesis 1 allows us to reference verse 2 to a time after the creation, in which the earth was laid waste and emptied. This checks with the fossil and geological records. 2) In extinction events that have spewed ash, debris, earth, and water into the atmosphere, such as the impact in the Yucatan, the Atmosphere becomes so filled with debris that the suns rays no longer reach the plants depending on photosynthesis. Then the plant eaters die... then the meat eaters. At this point, the first thing necessary to occur for life again to flourish is for the atmosphere to clear. Genesis 1, on the first day or age, states that the special event occurring in the first age was the clearing of the atmosphere, to allow the rays of the sun to filter through. This checks with the fossil and geological records. More on this in a few moments... 3) We see in Genesis 1 that waters and the atmosphere were in a chaotic state and that eventual settling allowed some water to settle back down to the earth, while some water was left trapped within the atmosphere. We can see from the various geological records, that we have certainly seen times when the water levels of the earth have varied drastically, and polar caps do not always explain this. This checks with the fossil and geological records. 4) Genesis 1 refers to EVOLUTION and was the ONLY ancient document to declare Evolution of the animals of the earth. It states evolution AS A FACT 3500 years before Darwin. This CERTAINLY checks with the fossil and geological records. 5) Genesis 1 goes on to tell us that man is unique among the rest of the animal kingdom. Genesis 1 tells us that God gifted man with the ability to dominate and take rule and dominion over the earth. It is easy to see our intelligence and body style allows for a lot of intellectual and technological advancement, but WHAT is behind this sudden JUMP of our species over all others? WHY are we so far above the rest of the animal kingdom that we would appear to be like gods? We find one clue on a genetic level and we are unique among ALL other primates partially because of our 2nd chromosome, which, genetic scientists tell us deals specifically with intelligence. Every primate has 48 chromosomes in 24 base pairs... EXCEPT for man, who only has 46 chromosomes in 23 base pairs. The mystery of our 2nd chromosome is that it actually has the appearance of having been fused with another chromosome. So somehow we apparently DEvolved into a simpler form, and yet we gained superiority, Evolving in intelligence. This adds EVEN MORE to the credibility of taking Genesis 1 literally, recognizing it to be describing our last major extinction event, and the subsequent restoration of life on earth. Now... Can I show that the bible actually says the earth BECAME destroyed and laid waste? Yes and I can show also this view goes back over 2000 years. http://ucg-canada.org/booklets/BT/versesofgenesis.asp And http://www.scripture4all.org/ ,,, then click into "Hebrew interlinear" and then click into "Genesis 1". In the Above link you will find it actually IS interpreted as "BECAME" destroyed in one ancient translation of the Targum. Then by going here: http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible...c=1&t=KJV&ss=1 You can see the corresponding number for the words "Was" "without form" and "void". Here you see the word translated "was" is also properly understood to mean: Quote: to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen, fall out We see "without form" is also properly understood as Quote: wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places) and void we see is also properly understood as Quote: emptiness, void, waste To further show that "the earth BECAME destroyed" is the intended translation: "Qal" "Qal", Was = to happen, fall out, occur, take place, come about, come to pass to come about, come to pass to come into being, become to arise, appear, come to become to become to become like Without form = wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places) place of chaos Void = emptiness, void, waste So then we see without question that Genesis 1, 1 and 2 can be meant to say in the Hebrew, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth BECAME decimated and a wasteland." So... it has to be said that so far this is exactly what we are told in the fossil and geological records. Ok... now Im going to lay another layer of information on top of the first. First I want to lay out a little more order to my theory/view, and then talk about what strata and the fossil record teaches us. Past extinction event healing patterns 1) The earth is laid waste 2) This earth has certainly seen extinction events which filled the atmosphere with water, debris, earth, and ash, causing photosynthesis to cease, starving the plant eaters and then starving the meat eaters. 3) Inevitably the atmosphere ALWAYS began to clear. It MUST clear in order to allow photosynthesis to begin again on a mass worldwide scale. 4) Inevitably life began to flourish in the seas. 5) Inevitably grasses and herbs began to flourish. 6) Inevitably the atmosphere clears to the point that the heavenS, as in the stars the sun and the moon, can be seen and distinguished clearly. Here I will begin to lay out the evidences for my theory. Simply as a reminder, My theory is that Genesis 1, begins in verse 2 to relay to us a brief history of an extinction event and the subsequent clearing of the atmosphere and healing of the earth. This is a very testable theory. When we test for the big bang/string/inflation, we don't test these theories directly. Using scientific procedure we have made predictions regarding eh theories, and tested them against observation. In this same way, my theory that God created everything and Genesis 1 describes an extinction event allows us to make predictions in regards to the details of Genesis 1, predicting that the details will match the fossil and geological records. Now we just need to lay them side by side and see if the theory matches the observations we can take advantage of. Testing: Test 1: If this holds any water, then the first thing we should be able to verify VERY quickly whether or not this earth has ever undergone an extinction event. Result: I believe that there is nearly 100 percent agreement within the scientific community, that this earth has endured extinction events. Geology AND paleontology PROVE that this earth has seen extinction events... My theory regarding Genesis 1 holds up under this point. This test against the facts in stone verify Genesis 1. Test 2: This described event indicates that the atmosphere was cluttered and darkened to the point no light could filter through. A large abundance of Water also was mixed in with the description of contents within the atmosphere. This is tested again according to the same evidence indicating mass extinction events in the past. Result: It is quite evident for instance because of the crater in Yucatan, that this earth has seen MULTIPLE extinction events and that some of these events would have erupted large amounts of water into the atmosphere, along with earth and ash and etc, and that this indeed went on to possibly be the cause for the extinction of the dinosaur. There certainly is no disagreement within the scientific community that this earth has seen disaster that darkened the skies, killed off all plant life, starving out the plant eaters, and then starving out the predators. Genesis 1 in no way conflicts with and is verified. Test 3: Now regarding the atmosphere placed between the waters we see in the 2nd day, we can see that waters settled below and around the atmosphere. This is nothing new at all. We see example of this many times. A recent giant planet was recently found with strange plasma like water hanging into the lower levels of the atmosphere, while another dwarf planet was recently found with an enveloping water vapor layer. Result: Again we verify that this indeed is not an extremely unusual occurrence, it is not at all outlandish, and we do observe in nature, this event taking place around us elsewhere. Test 5: We should be able to expect basic plant life, both marine and on land, to begin to flourish, now that the earth begins to warm and a bit of life begins to allow photosynthesis to give us back our paradise. Result: This is the exact order given to us in the passages of scripture, and it is the correct order shown in the fossil record. Genesis 1 is calling correctly the order we see in stone. Now on the 4th day or age, many people look at this and think it means the sun and moon were created on the 4th day. We disagree... We recognize that since we saw the PLURAL "heavenS" created before this first age, and that we saw LIGHT during the 2nd age, this is simply a poor translation of the literal hebrew poetry.. He is causing them to appear as opposed to actually creating them at this point. They were created with the "heavens". Accepting then that God simply "caused the sun and moon to appear" which is literally what the Hebrew states, we recognize this as simply the clearing of the atmosphere to the point that the heavens can be distinguished. Test 6: Most amazingly during the 5th age we see EVOLUTION. We see that after this extinction event, and after the light could once again begin to filter through, life begins to spring forth from the oceans. Genesis 1 states that life began evolving in the seas first and that even the birds descended from the sea: Quote: 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. ...IF this is true, then we should be able to note evolution in nature and in the fossil record. (nudge nudge wink) SO... how many times has this alone been tested? How many times have fossil finds shown us that life began in the water and evolved from there? How many? Sure there are a lot of connections that CANNOT be made or have not been made, but consensus is that life began in the seas and evolved... I can produce the consensus of NEARLY EVERY major scientist in this area. This is one of the best tested theories in science. I can literally produce hundreds of fossil finds that verify it. The only problem IS, they arrived to this consensus 3500 years after Genesis 1 stated it as a very bold fact. Sudden explosions of life coming out of nowhere http://www.economist.com/news/scienc...e...aeontol... Again... NOBODY KNOWS what detonated this Cambrian explosion. Now we must reason that when theory departs from unchanging stone records, we need to begin to reconsider certain dogmas. The fossil record is our WITNESS... to what really occurred. WHERE did this sudden explosion of life come from? The records in stone teach us that Darwin was WRONG about gradualism that he held so stubbornly to. Explosions HAVE come seemingly from nowhere... miraculously. Now lets look at Genesis 1 again: Quote: 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. NOTE the word ABUNDANTLY. Not only is Genesis 1 the ONLY ANCIENT DOCUMENT IN HISTORY to declare an evolutionary process, until Darwin, and not only did it teach as we know today, that life began in the seas, It DECLARES sudden explosions of life, JUST as we see in the Cambrian. DARWIN did NOT do this and this was where he and Huxley failed. They postulated a very long and very slow process of life evolving over hundreds of millions of years. This SIMPLY IS NOT what we find written in the fossil record. Sure life evolved, and sure it took time, but for some unexplained by science reason, life EXPLODED before it "evolved". Genesis 1 nails this on the head. 3500 years before Darwin and Huxley... and the fossil records prove Genesis 1 to be correct about the sudden explosion of life... Darwin and huxley, falsified in this aspect of the theory, Genesis 1, Verified. http://www.newscientist.com/article/...e...ambrian... http://www.csun.edu/~dgray/Evol322/Chapter18.pdf Quote: Darwin was a gradualist • Expected evolutionary change to be slow and continuous – Predicts many many intermediate forms • Many of course have been found in major groups – But many fossil morphological species • Appear suddenly in fossil record • Fewer transitional forms than you might expect • Darwin attributed stasis to incomplete fossil record http://www.icr.org/article/biggest-p...for-evolution/ http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/pr...sil-record.htm David B. Kitts. PhD (Zoology) is Head Curator of the Department of Geology at the Stoval Museum. In an evolutionary trade journal, he wrote: Now... this was a nutshell and we can fill in the spaces. We also have to tackle the Big Bang and String and inflaitonary theory, as this is the standard model of the universe. The current model of the universe utilizes the big bang, string theory, and inflaitonary theory. The string theory comes in attempting to fix the shortcomings of string, which simply was not working out mathematically. How does our current model of the universe fare in its testing? From http://io9.com/5714210/string-theory...erimental-test Quote: String theory fails first major experimental test From: http://www.popsci.com/science/articl...d-lhc-physicis... Quote: Physicists working at the Large Hadron Collider report that after a series of tests, they have not seen any mini black holes, to the chagrin of string theorists and the relief of disaster theorists. Researchers working on the Compact Muon Solenoid team have been crunching numbers to test a form of string theory that calls for the creation and instant evaporation of miniature black holes. They report that the telltale signs of these black holes are disappointingly absent, however. And again... Another failure... http://www.science.slashdot.org/stor...ould-spell-tro... Quote: "Paul Steinhardt, an astrophysicist at Princeton University in New Jersey, and colleagues have posted a controversial paper on ArXiv arguing, based on the latest Higgs data and the cosmic microwave background map from the Planck mission, that the leading theory explaining the first moments of the Big Bang ('inflation') is fatally flawed. In short, Steinhardt says that the models that best fit the Planck data — known as 'plateau models' because their potential-energy profiles level off at relatively low energies — are far less likely to occur naturally than the models that Planck ruled out. Secondly, he says, the news for these plateau models gets dramatically worse when the results are analyzed in conjunction with the latest results about the Higgs field coming from CERN's Large Hadron Collider. Particle physicists working at the LHC have calculated that the Higgs field is likely to have started out in a high-energy, 'metastable' state rather than in a stable, low-energy configuration. Steinhardt likens the odds of the Higgs field initially being perched in the precarious metastable state as to those of dropping out of the sky over the Matterhorn and conveniently landing in a 'dimple near the top,' rather than crashing down to the mountain's base." In other words, the Higgs data doesnt resemble standard predictions made by inflation. The data, more resemble plateau models... but then the Particle Physicists at CERN have noted that plateau models have problems of their own that prevent them from being verified... In other words again, the predicted models do not fit the observations... they are totally failing in every test in every respect. Remember that string touted itself as "The theory of everything", by greats like Alan Guth and Michio Kako. They amazed the word with their claims, yet Kako admits that string followed no scientific method whatsoever. It claimed to answer the mystery of what banged in the big bang... it claimed to answer several of the big bang's inconsistencies. But... we can bury the theory of everything now... and BB has lost any hope of answering these problems... as Guth and Kako both admit, String is the only game in town trying to answer these inconsistencies... and now string as you can see, has not just one, but REPEATEDLY been falsified.. http://planetsave.com/2012/12/03/sup...der-tests-phys... Quote: ‘Super Symmetry’ Theory Fails Collider Tests – Physicists Must Seek New ‘Theories of Everything’ ...The theory posited ‘super partner particles’ — exotic particles that accompany every known particles and what provide the ‘symmetry’ in super symmetry — that would indirectly confirm such controversial ‘New Physics’ theories as String Theory. But with recent high energy collision experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) producing (most likely) the fabled Higgs Boson — but none of the partner particles expected to appear within the energies ranges utilized — physicists are now having to reconsider one of their most prized theoretical models of the universe. SUSY Fails the Test According to physicist Mikhail Shifman, a once enthusiastic advocate of SUSY and author of an essay published on arXiv.org,, “…nature apparently doesn’t want it. At least, not in its original form.” So yes, String has been repeatedly falsified, and whats worse, Great notable scholars who were for decades proponents of string, are now it's biggest detractors and skeptics. It gets worse for BB and string... Because of certain observational inconsistencies with both hypotheses, they had to assume that there were obviously differences between the model and what is actually observed. To fill in THIS gap the pull out another untestable hypothesis from their bag of endless imagination that just keeps failing... Dark matter and dark energy
  20. I have been back on forth on this issue for most of my Christianity I am a strict bible believer, I do not think God wrote in Alegory, I believe He wrote what he meant and meant what He wrote So first lets start with some unassailable Biblical facts 1. God created the earth and the universe, and He spoke it into being. It did not evolve, and the order of creation disallows evolution as possibility. Light being created days before the sun moon and stars. Fish and Birds being created before land animals. 2. According the the geneologies in the bible we can fitfully trace the creation of man to about 6000 years ago. The bible gives the ages of each of the patriachs up to and including David and Solomon where we can nail a date , to extend to Jesus and then to us. So I have always believed that man has been around for @ 6000 years and history proves that out, (evolution says MODERN man has been around for 200,000 years..if that is the case then he was awfully quiet for the first 194,000) But I still tried to reconcile in my head that the world could have been created well before the creation of man....because of its supposed age. Until I read the following passages.....again Matthew 19:4 4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, Mark 10:6 6 But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. Jesus, our Lord clearly states, That God made man at the beginning of creation (not 4.6 billion years later) Now you can fudge around what that means Beginning, but Jesus' intent is clear, they were made in the creation process. And Jesus would know, because according to John 1:2 It was by Him that all things were made. So how do you reconcile the science with the bible truth? And then it came to me. Where does it say that everything God creates has to be new? Adam and Eve were not created as babies, but as full grown mature adults. Would it not make sense then that God would create the earth already old, run in and ready for life? And so like a play, God put everything in place (the earth the stars, the light already on the way from the stars" and simply cried action. When presented with two sets of facts. One from God, and one from men,we must never try to modify God to fit the wisdom of men. God is always true... Afterall, God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? (Numbers 23:19)
  21. On the significance of the age of the Earth Omegaman Republished from an earlier post on Feb 28, 2009 Is the Earth Old or Young ? No answers here, but some things to think about. I hear this question frequently, but I always wonder what is in the mind of the person asking the question. Is the answer to this question important, and if so, why and in what ways? An unbeliever might like to pit the conclusions of modern scientists, who almost universally hold to the idea that the Earth is very old against the apparent assertions of the Bible that the Earth is relatively young. In other words, if the Bible says the Earth is young, and scientists say the Earth is ancient, then clearly the Bible is wrong and not to be believed. A believer, on the other hand, might look at this problem and conclude, that the unbeliever has a point. Out of concern for the skepticism of the unbeliever, the believer might want to make it easier for the unbeliever to accept the Bible. Similarly, the believer may have his/her own doubts about this and so adopt the position that the correct interpretation of the scriptures is that the Earth is old and in harmony with the consensus of scientists. Personally, I believe the age of the Earth as it relates to an unbeliever is of little significance, and is usually either an excuse not to believe, or is a way of avoiding the important topic of the unbelievers salvation, or moral failures and their implications etc. As a believer addressing this issue with an unbeliever, I will point out that there are believers that hold both positions and that the real topic of concern is whether Jesus came to Earth, died for our sins, and was resurrected on the third day. That is the belief upon which our salvation rests, and any other topic pales in importance. Therefore, I shall be addressing this topic from the stand point of the believer – what it means to us. Is it important what we believe? What should we believe? What concerns me the most, is not what we believe in regards to this question so much as why we believe what we believe. A standard rule of biblical interpretation, is that we interpret the Bible literally, unless we are compelled to do otherwise. Some might make the case that the science is so compelling, that we have to interpret Genesis in some figurative way. I have to ask, what is it, that makes the science so compelling? I am a scientifically minded person, I run much of my daily life depending on ideas which science has observed and proven. Obviously, science has proven to be a powerful and useful tool. However, I think that the most trustworthy part of science, is the part where we can observe current phenomena, develop theories about the phenomena, and test those theories. When we begin to attempt to apply science to metaphysics – the spiritual part of our universe, science has left it’s realm of expertise. When examining topics of an historical nature – the issues of the formation of the universe, the development of life etc, science has also strayed from it’s expertise because it is attempting to guess what has happened in the past, from clues in the present. Most of the time, this will be of questionable reliability, since there is no way to repeat history in a test tube. It is gone, and not subject to examination. For me, what it comes down to then is this: “Which do you trust more, the pronouncements of a demonstrably infallible God, or the pronouncements of demonstrably fallible men?” Now, to be certain, we can make mistakes in our interpretation of the Bible, so both methods have a risk of error. Never-the-less, I believe that the Christian who maintains that the Bible teaches or allows for and ancient earth, is knowingly electing to disbelieve the most natural literal interpretation of the Bible, in favor of the theories of men, derived from the natural sciences. Personally, if I am wrong in my assessment that the Earth might be quite young, I would rather have the clear conscience of taking God at His word and be in error than choosing to trust the dictates of men that God pronounces to be fools for their unbelief of Him. It is true that there are reputable scientists who believe in an old Earth and who profess to be Christians. I do not doubt that most of these men and women are saved, trusting Jesus for their salvation. I do find it very odd, however, that they are willing to trust God about the scientifically unlikely event of the His resurrection, upon which their salvation rests, but cannot find it within themselves, to take Him at His word with regards to issues of origins. In fact, I find it saddening. As you have probably concluded, I am of a younger Earth persuasion. This is not to say that I believe that the Earth was created in 4004 B.C. as some assert. I note that the Bible never makes such a claim, and that this number is merely the result of calculations of a man who added up life spans and genealogies in the Bible. I have never checked his math, but in as much as the Jews were known to practice genealogies with gaps in them, recording more notable ancestors, it seems to me that there is some room for some extra time. In my estimation, all you can prove from the Bible about when the Earth was created, is that Adam, the first man, was created in 4004 B.C. or earlier. How much earlier, I have no idea. In other words, I do not believe the Bible makes any definitive statement on how old the Earth is. Having said that, can I prove there are gaps. Yes and no. The Bible as we know it, notes them itself, by comparing genealogies in some books versus others. In other words, different book describe ancestral lines with differing numbers of people in them. Therefore, some of these have to be incomplete, or else other have extra generations. If there are extras, then those passages are either untrue, or they are some sort of allegory. The do not appear to be allegory, so the most logical choice is that the others are not complete. If they are not complete, then we know that gaps were an allowable custom. Knowing that gaps are allowable, we can assume that all of the genealogies could contain gaps. Now, a little known and underdiscussed fact is, that the Hebrew text from which the 4004 B.C. creation date comes, is the Masoretic text, the major text underlying the translations of many modern Old Testaments. However, copies of the manuscripts of the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew, written some 300 years B.C. with extant copies going back to 400 A.D.) predates the Masoretic text by at least 350 years (the the oldest extant copy of the Masoretic text is Masoretic text dating to the 9th and 10th centuries A.D.) . Jesus and the apostles frequently quoted the Septuagint, so it is safe to assume it was thought reliable as the word of God. The genealogies of the Septuagint, if totaled in the same way that the 4004 B.C. Creation date was arrived at, push the creation date back to 5315 B.C. See how muddy and impossible it is to determine the date from the scripture? To me then, the Bible allows for an undetermined age of the Earth, and mankind is at least 6000 years old (7300 if going by the Septuagint). Which brings us to the length of creation time passed before God created mankind. The Old Earth Theorists, will have to hold to the idea that the 5 days prior to the creation of man, are not 5 literal days, but days which are of undetermined lengths of time, even millions of years each. This is done to force the scriptures to harmonize with scientific conclusions. That people may choose to interpret the Bible according to the dictates of predominantly atheistic scientists, is their own business. I think that it sets a very dangerous precedent, which allows for changing the meaning of the word of God, to suit whatever belief is in fashion. This is already being done in other portions of scripture. For example, science is looking to find a genetic causation for the behavior of homosexuality. If a link can be found to exist between heredity and sexual orientation, then what will follow is a discounting of the biblical notion that the practice homosexuality is a sin. Now, that leap will not be a logical one, but the leap will be made, never-the-less. I could cite other examples, but this one will serve to illustrate the point. However, even if it can be proven that homosexuality is genetically caused, it still does not alter the fact that God calls it a sin to practice, just as He calls it a sin for heterosexuals to act out their carnal desires outside of the man/woman marriage that He ordained. For myself, I shall not ever use the temporary and ever-changing opinions of science (or political correctness) to interpret the God inspired scriptures which never need adjustment, but that is just me. Many Old Earth Creationists are aware of the supremacy of God’s word, but just do not have enough faith in the most natural interpretation of scripture to overcome their faith in modern science. In such cases, I can understand that, but I wish more of them were honest about that fact that that is what the problem is. Sadly, too many choose instead, to find that the traditional beliefs of Christianity are suspect and inferior. It should not take any effort on my part, to convince anyone that the most natural interpretation of the creation days of Genesis, is that they are 6 literal days. Nothing in the text suggests otherwise. Old earth creationists will sometimes go to great lengths to point out that the Hebrew word for day, does not always mean a literal, twenty-four hour day. They are absolutely correct on that point. This Hebrew word is “Yom”. Gen 1:4-5 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning — the first day. (NIV) The first thing to notice about the word “day” as used in the creation account, is that it comes to us pre-defined. The light God called day. We do the same thing to this day. Also, one light and dark cycle, is also called a day. Just like we do. The implications of this one verse are a monumental obstacle, to anyone who wishes to maintain the notion that a day in Genesis, represents a length of time of thousands or millions of years. For one thing, we see here that in context, the word day is used identically as it is normally used in modern English. The internal, literary evidence therefore points to the conclusion that God intended this portion of scripture to be understood as literal, that a day is simply one cycle of light, most likely, near 24 hours long. To assume that something else is intended, is a gross violation of long established rules of interpretation, not only of the Bible, but for any document. Let’s suspend those rules momentarily, and allow for the idea that this day is, for example, not 24 hours, but one million years. Does this help Genesis square with modern scientific opinion? An interesting thing to note in the Genesis account, is that during this first day, the Sun has not yet been caused to shine upon the earth. The lightness and darkness that is cycling, is not sunlight. This gives some wiggle room because this light and dark, may not be dependent upon the rotation of the earth. We could say perhaps, that days were longer at that time. It get’s more difficult to maintain this notion though at creation day 4: Gen 1:16-19 16 God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning — the fourth day. (NIV) If these days are not 24 hours long, and we go back to the idea that a day is one million years long, might it be that the light was on for 500,000 years during a light/dark cycle. Since the old Earth theory is done to accommodate scientific opinion, then we should be consistent and assess the implication of 500,000 years of light. Is this light of similar intensity to what we experience from the Sun? If so, what would the surface temperature of the Earth rise to? Would the plants (created on the third day) survive the temperatures? Could they survive 500,000 years of darkness and no photosynthesis? I think interpreting the scriptures to accommodate scientific consensus, causes more problems that it solves. I think we have seen that interpreting Genesis passage literally, makes the most sense from a literary perspective. We have seen that interpreting it in the light of science, makes the text into nonsense. What about this word "yom" we touched on briefly, is there a reason to expect that it might mean other than 24 hours in the original Hebrew? My Bible software reports that this word "yom" occurs 2304 times in the Old Testament. That should be plenty of data to work with, to discover the likelihood that yom should be understood as some sort of age. How many times is yom not 24 hours in the Bible? Here are examples of how it is used otherwise: (1)The span of human life. – Gen 5:4: “And the days of Adam …. were eight hundred years.” “And if thou wilt walk …. then I will lengthen thy days” (1 Kings 3:14; compare Ps 90:12; Isa 38:5). (2) An indefinite time. – Existence in general: Gen 3:14: “All the days of thy life” (compare Gen 21:34; Num 9:19; Josh 22:3; Luke 1:24; Acts 21:10). (3) A set time. – Gen 25:24: “And when her days …. were fulfilled”; Dan 12:13: “Thou shalt stand in thy lot, at the end of the days” (compare Lev 12:6; Dan 2:44). (4) A historic period. – Gen 6:4: “The Nephilim were in the earth in those days”; Judg 17:6: “In those days there was no king in Israel” (compare 1 Sam 3:1; 1 Chron 5:17; Hos 2:13). (5) Past time. – Ps 18:18: “the day of my calamity”; Ps 77:5: “I have considered the days of old” (of Mic 7:20; Mal 3:7; Matt 23:30). (6) Future time. – Deut 31:14: “Thy days approach that thou must die”; Ps 72:7: “In his days shall ….” (compare Ezek 22:14; Joel 2:29; Matt 24:19; 2 Peter 3:3; Rev 9:6). (7) The eternal. – In Dan 7:9,13, where God is called “the ancient of days.” (8) A season of opportunity. – John 9:4: “We must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work” (compare Rom 13:12-13; 1 Thess 5:5-8). See DAY (4), above. That was from the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Copyright ©1996 Did you see anything there that seemed to suggest eons of time? Most of those uses are less that a human lifespan. Some, are references to historical periods – in other words AFTER the creation of man. The one possible exception, is number 7 above, but it is a reference to God Himself, not his creation. In short, to say that the word Yom contains the potential to represent millions of years, is forcing a definition or use of it, that is so extreme compared to actual uses of the word, that it can be considered as nothing other than a desperate grasping at straws by those that lack the faith to take God at His word. If any choose to believe the unstable opinions of the sciences over the revelation of God’s word, I am okay with that, I really am. I just wish they would have the honesty to state that they feel the need to abuse the science of hermeneutics to satisfy their own uneasiness about God’s word, instead of trying to convince others that it is somehow justified or legitimate to force personal beliefs upon the interpretation of scripture. To quote Prof. James Barr from the EXPOSITOR’S BIBLE: “If the word ‘day’ in this chapter does not mean the period of 24 hours, the interpretation of Scripture is hopeless.”. Is the evidence too strong against the bible, or at least of a literal interpretation of it? Certainly if scientific consensus is going to be the determining factor concerning out faith and theology, we have to ask the question: What about the resurrection? Scientific consensus would be that a man who dies, and remains dead for three days, stays dead. If God cannot defy the opinions of scientists, then no miracles happen, not now, not ever, and the resurrection never took place. If that is true, then Christianity is little more than a collection of interesting tales, sort of like Aesop's Fables. If God is going to be limited to our understanding of the laws of nature, then why would we be wondering about the length of the creation period. A God without the power to do the miraculous, could not bring the creation into existence in the first place. If that creation did not happen, then why would we suspect that creation has an author at all, and without such and author, does sin really exist? Who gets to define what is sin and what is not, who decides how salvation is accomplished or if it is even necessary. Is there really even an afterlife? Apart from a revelation from a supernatural God, these things are all unknowable, and Christianity has no real value. It may not be critically important, how long creation took, but knowing that it took place, believing God by faith that it did, is important, and I have to wonder how much we really believe God, if we cannot trust Him to accurately describe and make plain, the details of His own creation. Consider some of the implications of a lengthy creation. How does it affect other beliefs or statements from the Bible? Do other passages make reference to the creation events – do we call them into question? Did Jesus or the apostles mention anything about the creation account that would leave you to believe that they took it literally – if so, how does that affect their credibility? If we can choose to ignore a literal interpretation in Genesis – do we then grant ourselves the same license in other parts of the Bible – if so, how will you know where and when? These are questions each person must address and consider. While science has century by century, worked to discover how the universe works, each generation of scientists has seen major scientific opinions come and go. Each generation of scientists indeed, has at it’s disposal, new knowledge and new tools to investigate the natural world. Each generation has advanced the collective knowledge of mankind, and each has refuted theories held dearly by colleagues of previous generations, and yet, after thousands of years, is still seeking answers to fundamental questions, answers that are elusive. Meanwhile, the Christian is able to hold the same views as Jesus and the apostles expressed 2000 years ago, with no need to apologize for any of them. The 20th Century saw the sciences advance at a tremendous rate, but as theories about origins and cosmology became more refined and old ones discarded as obsolete, we found that the theories of prevailing science, are looking more like the bible all the time. Of course, science cannot truly address origins and cosmology ultimately, because those things are outside of it’s scope of examination. Science works in the present, it examines present clues about past events. The past is not like electricity or chemistry, it cannot be replicated or examined directly. Modern science is even more at a disadvantage, to look into matters of a spiritual nature. Science examines natural phenomena, the supernatural is outside it’s purview. Still, it is interesting to observe that scientists seem to be edging their way toward beliefs that the bible expressed all along. Considering that the bible is not intended to be a science text book, it is remarkable how many scientific facts it got right before scientists would discover them. Addendum, added on 11/14/2014 Some years ago I developed a calculator which computes theoretical future population numbers from assumed starting calculation numbers and factors like length of generations, birth rates etc. It cannot adequately factor in unknown and unpredictable events like plagues, wars, etc. due to complexity and my own ignorance on those subjects. I also know that there is some error in the math, that skews the results by a generation or two, and I have not been able to figure out where the error lies, and have given up trying, I have more important things to do. However, if you would like to speculate and experiment with the calculator, using your own chosen assumptions, I have decided to publish the calculator as it is. While it is imperfect, I beleive it does demonstrate that the young earth model is more feasible that the ancient earth model, based on math and what we know about population growth and statistics, if the interests you at all, have fun by: clicking here. (http://omegazine.com/population/populationpredictions/populationpredictions.htm) Below were 10 Responses to the original posting of “On the significance of the age of the Earth”: shawn Says: March 9th, 2009 at 11:16 am This is such an unfortunate topic for Christians. I am a believer in Yeshua. I also believe that Rome High jacked Christianity and changed it into what ever they wanted. Not only did they change the Shabbat to the day they worshiped the sun, as well as a great many other holy days, but they also changed the relationship between the Torah and science. In Judaism the Torah and modern science go hand in hand. Many of the great Jewish sages hundreds of years ago calculated the age of the universe to be 13 billion years old and they did this using the same bible that christians use to say the earth is only 6000 years old. Because Rome high jacked christianity and changed a great many of things we have not only lost great spiritual gifts but we have also lost a most basic understanding of our natural universe that the rabbi’s have until this very day. If you want to rectify the bible and science you dont need to try and debunk science, science is from Hashem. Science is good, it is our roman inheritance of the hatred of science that is bad. Rome hated science because they hated any opposition to their views on how to interepret the bible. But if we take back what rome stole from us, our Israelite heratige as christians, then we will finally be able to rectify not only science but also a great many spiritual gifts and understandings that were stolen from us. Blessing to you and your community in the name of Yeshua HaMashiach our Rabbi. josiah Says: April 6th, 2009 at 7:35 am hi..My name is Jos , from new zealand and im 38 years of age, currently studying at otago unversity in new zealand. I disagree with some of your statements, and would like to offer a rebuttal.I dont think this is a unfortunate topic, nor do i agree with your quote that it is irrelevant..I quote from your text “Personally, I believe the age of the Earth as it relates to an unbeliever is of little significance, and is usually either an excuse not to believe, or is a way of avoiding the important topic of the unbelievers salvation. As a believer addressing this issue with an unbeliever, I will point out that there are believers that hold both positions and that the real topic of concern is whether Jesus came to Earth, died for our sins, and was resurrected on the third day. That is the belief upon which our salvation rests, and any other topic pales in importance” If you look into the historical context, to the unbeliver, the church has always suppresed the formation of scientific ideas formed from observation and interpretation of the results.This is why we had “dark ages” and why they are called “dark ages”. Christians are all too happy to accept the material benifits of technological and scientific endevour, such as internet, computers, carpets and the lightbulb but when it comes to facing up to the questions asked by the scientific community, most immediatly go into ostritch mode and pretend they dont exist until the thing goes away. but the thing doesnt go away, and now all the things that havent gone away are taught as scientific fact to your children.I dont have any children, so that why i say your children. I am a christian – that is i belive and try to adhere to the teachings of Jesus of nazereth and his disiples.I belive Jesus of nazereth is the son of God. I belive he died on our behalf for my sins and wrongdoings against God, and by accepting his sacrifice on my behalf i will have eternal life with him in The presence of God the Father and The holy spirit and all the Angels and others who have believed as i do. I also belive that the law and the prophets, the old testament was inspired by God and in some books directly transmitted by God Orally to Moses, such as the book of Genesis. I belive that the interpretation of the words of Genesis is literal, that is creation took 6 literal 24 hour periods.I am also a scientist. I am currently returned to university to undertake a B.A. in Lingustics, with a minor in Geology. I like volcanoes. i know that the current interpretation of the Geological record is in error. The majority of the Geologic community dissagree with me. some might even go so far as to say that i am misguided, or quite simply a religous nutter.you can imagine that someone with views like mine goes down in academic circles like a lead balloon at a party.lol. But there are flaws in the theory of geologic time, that can be found. The truth points to itself. Its time for us to admit we don’t know all the answers, nor should we pretend too.This is the crux of what scientific method or reasoning is about -to quote websters dictionary… “principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses..” but i do belive we should tackle these problems with Faith in the Lord Jesus christ as our guide, pray for guidance, and look for credible scientific evidence to support the creation story and present this to everyone freely for discussion and debate because surely as eggs are eggs if we dont try to answer the hard questions, and tackle the problems presented by the current view of the community at large for a old earth and no God, why should people resonably listen to us when we try to share our beliefs? And as you can see currently in the textbooks of any mainstream high school, the Devil is not lax. What makes us different from the ten-thousand other wacko’s with thier own take on The metaphysical universe? I personally dont belive, although i may be wrong, that Paul the apostle, who was a learned man would agree with your arguement, but putting it in context, he said” i count it all as loss for the gospel,” yet he reasoned with men, trying to win them over to the gospel by showing them thier errors in logical thinking as well as christian works of good deeds, and living at peace with all men as far as possible. I hope you take my argument to heart and consider it. afterwards, you may still belive that i am wrong.I would like to hear your thoughts. jos..11.35, 6th april 2009. Omegaman 2.0 Responds: April 10th, 2009 at 12:31 am Hi Jos, I don’t think I have anything to disagree with there, and yet my mind has not changed. How is this possible? I am an apologist, I believe in being ready always to give and answer for the hope that I have. Does my hope lie in the age of the earth, or in questions like “how could all the animals fit on the ark”? My hope lies in a risen savior. That is what I am supposed to defend. I am a young earther personally, but I find that giving answers to defend that view to be a poor investment in time. I have those answers, and answers for the animals on the ark etc. How about the existence of God? Yes, I can defend those too. I have spent hours at a time doing so many times, and in my experience, all I end up doing is convincing people that I am more knowledgeable than they first believed, and that I actually have some good points. Good for my ego, but not worthwhile. That is all well and good, if my task is to win debates, but I think it more important, to win souls. So, I may have not been clear on my comments, by not being thorough enough in my explanation. My point is, that Christians can go round and round debating the age of the earth themselves, the topic is not relevant to unbelievers from our point of view if it does not move them closer to a decision. I think that these kind of doubts, shared by believers and unbelievers alike, distract us from the real issues. If a person is curious about how I can hold a young earth view, I will make my response in as brief and yet convincing way that I can, but I am going to change the topic to the gospel as quickly as I can – the heart of what I am called to defend. What I find is, that as soon as I defend the early age of the earth, the subject will then go: “what about the animals”, I answer and the subject then goes “what about all the contradictions in the Bible”, and so on and so on and so on. Games of "what about" and "what if", are the ploys of one who seeks to win a debate, not one who wants to ponder the issues. Paul described a type of person that would exist in the last days: ” They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. – 2 Tim 3:6-7 NIV I do not want to enable anyone to remain in that category – merely always learning. I want to attempt to get them to acknowledge the truth. In as much as Jesus instructed the disciples: “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.” - Matt 10:14 I take it He meant that we need to be wise, not wasting time casting our pearls before swine, but instead, moving on to greener pastures, where the sheep know they need a shepherd. Lest you still miss my point, I was not trying to say that the age of the earth is of no relevance, and certainly your point about Christians needing to have credibility is a valid one. However, most of the people that the normal Christian encounters, are not scientists, are not familiar with the research nor the scientific method. For the average Christian to try to convince the average unbeliever on the topics in early Genesis, is very difficult. After all, if that person is swayed by science, he will most likely automatically ignore the opinion of a Christian, who is not a scientist normally, and favor the opinion of an actual expert. If he is not swayed by science, then you are wasting your time anyway, as he will not listen to either one of you. Remember, even Christians disagree on the topic, so, I would rather move on to the topic all Christians agree on, the person of Jesus Christ, the center of our faith and hope. To quote you: “I like volcanoes. i know that the current interpretation of the Geological record is in error. The majority of the Geologic community disagree with me. some might even go so far as to say that i am misguided, or quite simply a religious nutter.you can imagine that someone with views like mine goes down in academic circles like a lead balloon at a party.” I believe you, and I believe the the unbelieving world get that. If you cannot convince your colleagues, I am not sure how successful you will be with those who are more willing to believe them that you. Now in the context of academic circles, I believe these topics are critically important. I am just referring to the day to day encounters of believers, who spend time in debates that cannot be won, because in those debates, it is not the truth that matters to some, the only thing that matters to them is to win, or, in some cases to not lose, and therefore remain comfortable in their unbelief. In as much as there are Christians who believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, who came and died for our sins, that we might be forgiven and have eternal life, who also believe that the Bible is the inerrant and inspired word of God and who also believe in an ancient earth and a lengthy creation process, I have little desire, nor do I see much benefit, to devoting too much time to topics that do little to advance the case of Christ. The topic is not related to salvation, and that is why I give it little significance. That is all I meant by that paragraph that you so eloquently and respectfully rebutted. Thank you for taking the time to read my ‘article’ and investing the time to correct me. Omegaman Omegaman 2.0 Responds: April 11th, 2009 at 3:12 am Quoteing Shawn: “In Judaism the Torah and modern science go hand in hand. Many of the great Jewish sages hundreds of years ago calculated the age of the universe to be 13 billion years old and they did this using the same bible that christians use to say the earth is only 6000 years old. ” Do you have any sources for this Shawn, that would be interesting to see. I also cannot fathom that anyone could “calculate” 13 billion years using anything in the Bible. If it was Rome that hijaaked the faith and came up with the 6000 year old calculation, why does the Jewish calendar indicate that it as been 5769 years since the creation? FresnoJoe Says: May 31st, 2009 at 4:05 am The Reason I Must Discount The Speculations Of Various White Coats And Such Is The Record Of Book Of Beginnings And All The References (OT/NT) To My LORD’s Part As Creator And The Accounting Of The Short Lineage Of The Brothers/Sisters From Jesus All The Way Back To The Sixth Day Of Creation “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,” “Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,” “Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,” “Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,” “Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,” “Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,” “Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,” “Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,” “Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,” “Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,” “Which was th”e son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,” “Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,” “Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,” “Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,” “Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,” “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” Luke 3:23-38 If One Believes In The Resurrection (After Three Days!) Of The Uncorrupted Physical Body Of Our LORD And Our Savior And The Redemption Of Vile Hateful Sinner Man By The Holy And Pure Blood Of The Lamb Of God Then The Creation Of Life, The Universe And Everything Is Just The Finger Play Of God And Will Be Nothing Compared To The Knowledge Of The Heights Of The Love And The Amazing Grace God Offers To The Sons Of Adam To Folks Such As You And I Love, Joe andrew o'shea Says June 19th, 2009 at 7:04 am: oh the mysteries of God. all will be revealed at the gathering of the saints, children of God who believe in the Son Jesus Christ, Yeshua. people by nature like to argue, that has always been man’s problem and why we have to have wars. It is by faith we believe God, a gift He gave us. I had my experience and have never looked back, i believe God. The only thing that matters to me is that i can relate to people the love God has for them that may recieve remission of sins and eternal life, John 14 v 26 the Holy Spirit will teach us all things and bring to our rememberance all the things we have been taught.’ it really doesn’t matter to me how old the earth is rather how much time is left. a great deception of the enemy is to get us to focus on things any thing that distracts from the salvation message, eternal life. we can ask and be told how old the earth is,i did, God bless you all on your journeys, no i wont ‘measure the earth’ i wouldn’t know where to begin. searching scripture i came to approx. 6000 years, think about God’s time line, 7 is a sabbath,mmmm getting close to Jesus return. come Lord come hallelujah, repent and be save God loves us amen Linda Says July 3rd, 2009 at 10:40 pm: Here’s a way to think about the “How old is the earth” question. When God created Adam he created a man. Not baby. Not a child. Simply put…. who is to say that God did not create the earth as an “adult earth”. Why do we think it had to be created in an infant stage? Lean not to our own understanding. Omegaman 2.0 Responds: July 15th, 2009 at 11:16 pm Hi Linda. I believe you are relating an argument often put forth by those who hold to an old earth theory, in answer to those who hold to the idea of an more recent creation on the basis that the universe and the earth appears old, much older than 6000 ears. The young earthers sometimes respond to the that the earth has an appearance of age, because God created it that way, mature as you put it. There answer to that would be that the earth does not just appear mature, it appears worn out. By analogy with adam, it would be like God created Adam with teeth that were worn down, were stained yellow, had cavities and perhaps few missing as well. By this analogy, Eve would be looking in the mirror at her gray hair and wrinkles on her first day, if she had been created with the appearance of age, instead of mere maturity. Many scientists and those who follow their lead, believe the earth worn, not merely mature. While my point was that the whole issue should not given more importance than it merits. That being said, I will give the response that the Old Earthers would give. They would also point out, that if God created the world to look that old, when it was in fact only a few thousand years old, then that would make God a deceiver, as though He was trying to fool people into believing the young earth was ancient, when that is not the case. Personally, I find that to be one of the most powerful arguments from the Old Earth camp. Of course, like most things there are difficulties. While an old earther can state that creating an earth to look old, makes God a deceiver if it is in fact young, does not the old earther have the same dilemma, if the earth is actually old, yet God chose to say it is young in His word? I prefer to accept that the earth is young, doing my best to understand scripture, and maintain that God is not a deceiver, but that some scientists are in error in how they interpret data, and in some cases, maybe they are the deceivers. I could go into details of what I think might be solutions to why the young earth appears old, but that is not the purpose of the post. I am not putting forth an apologetic for a young earth, I am making the point that faith in what God has said, trumps evidence from modern science for believers who think like I do. Sohei Says: August 21st, 2009 at 3:48 am Wasn’t Jesus a Jewish rabbi? Then he was taught same as others, which he didn’t dispute. They say Earth is 5769 years old. I would guess you would have to argue with what Jesus was taught. Sohei, do you have any source material demonstrating that the belief among Jewish rabbis 2000 years ago, was in a young earth of the age you suggest? I don't think Jesus was a rabbi in the way we usually think of the term, but I do suspect, that He would have understood from the scripture, that the earth was fairly recent, and of course being the Creator, He actually knew for certain at some level. winsomebulldog Says March 26th, 2010 at 9:53 am: I’m not positive about how old this post is, but I just wanted to leave a quick comment none-the-less. I have read through several of your posts and find it comforting to encounter another “scientifically minded” Christian. Sometimes, those two things instigate internal battles, and some might even argue that the very notion is an oxymoron. My husband and I cannot, however, change who and what we are. We are intelligent people who respect and appreciate the sciences. We are also Christians. Our faith does, and in truth must, outweigh our intelligence. Our God gave us both the ability to learn and a hunger for learning. Hubby is an engineer and at one time was in the aeronautical engineering program at Perdu University with an eye toward NASA. He has a grasp of physics and math that I cannot even fathom at times. But even he knows that science is nothing more than an effort by finite, fallible humans to define and quantify the unfathomable. Personally, I am willing to admit that there have been times in my life that I found myself struggling to reconcile what my mind wanted to believe and what my faith demanded that I accept. It is very easy, I think, for a scientifically minded Christian to be seduced by all the scientific “evidence.” It can sound so convincing. And Lord knows that scientists these days are very fond of spouting off their theories as if they are in fact scientific laws. (One look at the pervasive THEORY of evolution is evidence of that.) Hubby and I are fond of scientific programming on television and have watched more than a few that dealt with everything from dinosaurs to the big bang theory. How anyone with a critical mind could not see the evidence of the countless suppositions that are made here is beyond us both. We have both concluded that it would be vastly easier to be Christians without a bent toward scientific, critical thinking. But God did not create us that way and so we must both strive to never let our brains override our faith. I have rambled on far longer than I intended. But I really wanted to let you know how much I have appreciated your posts. Thank you for speaking your mind without fear. And thank God for forums like this that allow Christians everywhere to connect and share. God Bless You.
  22. “Feathered Dinosaur” Featured Long Tail Plumage, Evolutionists Say I do not endorse anything these people say, nor do I reject what they say. I am an agnostic in this area, but I thought the article was interesting, and I thought some of you might as well. Comment: I believe I have opined before, that I think this section should be Faith & Science, not Faith VS. Science, it does not always have to be one against the other. I think I have as much faith in God and the Bible as anyone, but I like science, it is not the enemy. Faulty conclusions, are another matter. anyway, click the title to view the article.
  23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckfrn5-86xU
  24. From A Dear Non-Believer In The Creator Christ Of The Bible Yet A Proud Believer In The Knowledge Of Dirt Sans Any Personnel Knowledge Of God For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. Hosea 6:6 So.... Is Creation A Viable Model of Origins In Today's Modern Scientific Era? He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11 God's Thoughts, Your Thoughts And How These Thoughts Relate To Your Hopes He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them. 2 Samuel 2:8 All Respectful And Loving Truths, Speculations, Musings And Cogitations Are Welcome As Long As They Are Respectful Of The LORD Jesus And Of The Clear Words Of His Holy Bible And Of The Trust Of The Little Children Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Hebrews 11:3 A Short Observation Of Mine The Field Of Physics Has Been Known To Occasionally Function As A Science Of Observations As Well As A Hot Bed Of Seething Philosophical And Metaphysical Expressions The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Numbers 6:24-27 And May You All Be Richly Blessed By Your Time Spent On Worthy Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. Proverbs 27:17 Love, Your Brother Joe
×
×
  • Create New...