YOUNG EARTH EVIDENCE

[guestman]

Enoch2021,
Paul did use the word "debate" at 2 Timothy 2:8, for the Greek word dialogismos that he used, contextually means "discussion i.e. (internal) consideration (by implication, purpose),or (external) debate"(Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says "disputing", pg 139) So, as a Christian, I will not debate or dispute Scripture with anyone, for that is a waste of time and energy and contrary to Scriptural guidelines.

That the earth is billions of years can easily be seen from Genesis 1:1, that says: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth". The distance light has traveled, calculated in many cases as billions of "light years" give evidence that the universe and the earth is billions of years old. So when scientists give the age of 13.8 billion years for the universe does not contradict the Bible's account.(Henrietta Leavitt discovered how to measure distances to the stars in 1912, based period-luminosity of cepheids or stars that varied in brightness)

After Jesus exposed the Pharisees for their hypocrisy at Matthew 15:1-11, instead of these recognizing their wicked attitude, they were "stumbled", so that Jesus disciples wondered what Jesus was going to do. Jesus simply informed them: "Every plant that my heavenly Father did not plant will be uprooted. Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into the pit".(Matt 15:12-14)

Thus, just as Jesus saw no need to continue, trying to "convince them", he simply left them alone and so will I, no matter how you try to twist my words. I have already provided enough evidence for reasonable people, not for those who have "an axe to grind".

Acts 13:48 describes the kind of people that a true Christian is looking for, one "rightly disposed for everlasting life".

[Guest Teditis]

Since God made Adam and Eve as adults, why couldn't He create the stars with their light shining instantaneously?

I think that the evidence that we currently have at our disposal, tends to show that the Earth is young... 10-20,000 yrs.

[Enoch2021]

6 minutes ago, guestman said:

Paul did use the word "debate" at 2 Timothy 2:8, for the Greek word dialogismos that he used, contextually means "discussion i.e. (internal) consideration (by implication, purpose),or (external) debate"(Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says "disputing", pg 139) So, as a Christian, I will not debate or dispute Scripture with anyone, for that is a waste of time and energy and contrary to Scriptural guidelines.

It's NOT, that's clearly not the message of that passage and is Clearly PUMMELED by...

(2 Corinthians 10:5) We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.."

 

Quote

That the earth is billions of years can easily be seen from Genesis 1:1, that says: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth". The distance light has traveled, calculated in many cases as billions of "light years" give evidence that the universe and the earth is billions of years old.

Factually Incorrect:

According to 'The Narrative', "Light Years" is not a measure of "Time"...it's one of "Distance". 

For you to be able to ascertain the "Time" component, you *MUST KNOW* the..."One-Way" Speed of Light. 

 

Unfortunately, you can never know that because it's a Begging The Question Fallacy... In TOTO, resulting from the inability to Synchronize 2 'clocks' by some distance. 

 

Watch...

 

How do we determine the "SPEED" or "RATE" of something??

 

Distance = Rate x Time, right??  So...

 

R = D/T

 

It's the "T" that's in focus here. You need 2 Clocks, right? Clock A (Terminus a quo) and Clock B (Terminus ad quem).

 

According to Einstein's 'Relativity', the moment you move Clock B... That Clock is DE-SYNCHRONIZED !!!!

 

What do you Need to KNOW to reconcile and SYNCHRONIZE Clock B to Clock A ??  That's Right Folks...

 

 

*The "One-Way" Speed of Light !!!*

 

 

So the ENTIRE Exercise is a TEXTBOOK: Begging The Question Fallacy.  Einstein made the very same conclusion...

 

 

“It would thus appear as though we were moving here in a logical circle.”
A. Einstein, Relativity: The Special and General Theory, authorized translation by R. W. Lawson (New York: Crown Publishers, 1961), pp. 22–23.

Regarding the "One Way" Speed of Light, Einstein concluded....“That light requires THE SAME TIME to traverse the path A-M as for the path B-M is in reality NEITHER A SUPPOSITION NOR A HYPOTHESIS about the physical nature of light, but a stipulation which I can make of *MY OWN FREEWILL* in order to arrive at a definition of simultaneity.” 
A. Einstein, Relativity: The Special and General Theory, authorized translation by R. W. Lawson (New York: Crown Publishers, 1961), p. 23.

 

Ergo...the Speed of Light (average "Two-Way" Speed) is merely a *'CONVENTION'* that we've agreed upon.

 

More strikingly, according to Quantum Mechanics... Independent of Knowledge/Existence of 'which-path' Information, " LIGHT " (Photons) --  have no defined properties or location. Photons exist in a state of a Wave Function which is a series of Potentialities rather than actual objects. That is, Matter/Photons don't exist as a Wave of Energy prior to observation but as a Wave of Potentialities. 

 

“It begins to look as we ourselves, by our last minute decision, have an influence on what a photon will do when it has already accomplished most of its doing… we have to say that we ourselves have an undeniable part in what we have always called the past. The past is not really the past until is has been *REGISTERED. Or to put it another way, the past has no meaning or existence unless it exists as a RECORD in the present*.”
Prof. John Wheeler "Referenced in"; The Ghost In The Atom; Page 66-68.

Unless you can explicitly identify "A Knower" @ the source of this Light (Photons)....who also "observed" it's entire 'path', AND the "observer" who first identified it here on Earth and *RECORDED* it (Date and Time stamped) THEN, you're gonna have to provide....
 

 

*The Speed of a Wave of Potentialities !!* 

 

 

Go ahead...I'll get the Popcorn !!! 

 

*ps.  As you can determine quite easily above, In Reality...Light Years is neither a measure of "Time" or "Distance". It's merely a "Convention", that we've agreed upon.  Voila*

 

 

In conclusion, your appeal here is quite Nonsensical.

 

Quote

 

After Jesus exposed the Pharisees for their hypocrisy at Matthew 15:1-11, instead of these recognizing their wicked attitude, they were "stumbled", so that Jesus disciples wondered what Jesus was going to do. Jesus simply informed them: "Every plant that my heavenly Father did not plant will be uprooted. Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into the pit".(Matt 15:12-14)

Thus, just as Jesus saw no need to continue, trying to "convince them", he simply left them alone and so will I, no matter how you try to twist my words.

 

Another False Equivalence Fallacy.

1.  I'm not a Pharisee or a Hypocrite.

2.  You're not Jesus.

 

Quote

I have already provided enough evidence for reasonable people, not for those who have "an axe to grind".

You've provided Abject Speculations without Scriptural or Scientific Basis.  Nothing more, Nothing Less.

 

regards

[guestman]

Enoch2021

Paul did use the word "debate" and straightforwardly told true Christians not to do so, telling them to "carry on prayer, lifting up hands without anger and debates". ("debate", Greek dialogismos meaning "discussion, i.e. debate", Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible)

Paul's use of the word "anger" ties directly in with debates, not "doubting" as the King James Bible says, for that is what happens when two or more people debate, whereby proper reasoning is thrown out the window and each is trying to prove their "point" and anger often gets the best of them.

I will not argue with you, just as the apostle Paul finally tired of dealing with the obstinate Jews in Corinth, despite providing considerable evidence that "Jesus is the Christ", who "kept on opposing him and speaking abusively", so that "he shook out his garments and said: "Let your blood be on your own heads. I am clean".(Acts 18:5, 6)

At John 9 concerning the man born blind, the Pharisees asked this man how he was healed, which he described. However, they contested his words, saying that Jesus was "not a man of God".(John 10:13-16) The Pharisees again asked the man born blind how he felt about Jesus, which he responded that he was a "prophet".(John 10:17)

For the third time, the Pharisees asked the man born blind concerning Jesus "What did he do to you ? How did he open your eyes ?" The man born blind was by now becoming very irritated with their unwillingness to recognize what Jesus did, so that he told the Pharisees: "I told you already, and yet you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again ? You do not want to become his disciples also, do you ?"(John 10:26, 27)

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Jesus is from God by his healing the man born blind, the obstinate Pharisees became enraged and threw the man born blind out from the synagogue.(John 10:34) But this did not deter either Jesus nor the man born blind, but rather this now healed man became obedient to Jesus.(John 10:38)

On another occasion, when Jesus was walking in the temple colonnade of Solomon, the Jews pried him with the question: "How long are you going to keep us in suspense ? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly". Jesus responded: "I told you, and yet you do not believe".(John 10:22-25)

So, this will be my last response to you. Any of your future retorts will simply be put in the "trash" folder. (read Prov 18:2)

[one.opinion]

Scientific evidence in several different field suggest a much older earth than 6.000 to 10,000 years. Acceptance of an earth this young requires dismissal of scientific observation. Personally, I believe in Jesus Christ as creator as taught in John 1. I also accept the scientific evidence that supports an ancient earth and the theory of evolution. An all-powerful God could have created in any way He wished, but what he made evident to scientific observation certainly favors my viewpoint.

[one.opinion]

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

And science says all the marks on the moon are meteorite impacts, but another science has proven that assumption wrong: electromagnetic storms are to blame. It was in the news just last week. (Do your own homework!)

This is your claim, so it is your responsibility to provide the citation.

 

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

You can't see the wind, but you can only see the effects of the wind. A gravity source is out there that's affecting our solar system science can't explain. They can't see it, but they observe that something is causing anomalies.

Exactly, we can observe the effects of wind and know that it exists. We can also see the effects of age on the planet and be pretty confident that it looks old because it is old.

 

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

Carbon-14 saturation is not a constant, nor is the speed of light (which is proven to be slowing by 1%/century).

Rock dating uses other radioisotopes, not Carbon-14. Please show the data indicating that the speed of light is slowing.

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

In the 1950's DNA was discovered and that science was born.

Please be accurate when stating facts. Friedrich Miescher discovered what we now know as DNA in the 1860s. A tremendous amount of important DNA research was performed in the first few decades of the 1900s (check out Thomas Hunt Morgan for one researcher). It was the structure of DNA that was reported in 1953 by Watson and Crick.

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

Ya know, you cannot reconcile a young earth because you don't have faith.

It is probably presumptuous to claim someone doesn't have faith without knowing them. I assure you that my faith in Jesus Christ, His sacrificial death, and His triumphant resurrection are very real to me, and a faith that paints the thoughts, words, and deeds of my entire life. Although those thoughts, words, and deeds may not always be completely in line with His direction, it is what I strive for.

On 8/20/2017 at 2:40 PM, Abdicate said:

In fact, word in Hebrew is the same for things.

I'm not a Hebrew scholar, but I'd be very interested in reading more about this, if you could share with me.

In Christ,

[Guest shiloh357]

On 8/20/2017 at 1:21 PM, one.opinion said:

Scientific evidence in several different field suggest a much older earth than 6.000 to 10,000 years. Acceptance of an earth this young requires dismissal of scientific observation.

The notion of an old earth predates science by several hundred years.  

But the Bible presents us with a young earth.  So the problem is deciding if the Bible got it wrong and if it did, how can anything else it says be trusted?  If the Bible got it wrong right out of the gate about the length of creation, did the Bible get it wrong about the origin of sin?   Did it get it wrong about the Exodus from Egypt? How do we know that Jesus really performed miracles, if we cannot trust what the Bible says in all matters it addresses?

Quote

Personally, I believe in Jesus Christ as creator as taught in John 1. I also accept the scientific evidence that supports an ancient earth and the theory of evolution.

That's complete nonsense.   The theory of Evolution is in complete contradiction to the biblical teaching of a personal creator.  There are those who refer to themselves as "theistic evolutionists " and that is as oxymoronic as referring to oneself as an atheistic Christian.  You are one or the other.  You either believe in Evolution and must call God a liar, or you believe the Bible as God's inerrant and unchanging, inspired Word.

 

Quote

An all-powerful God could have created in any way He wished, but what he made evident to scientific observation certainly favors my viewpoint.

There is no evidence for macro-Evolution. It simply doesn't exist and the theory of Evolution is based on an impersonal, wholly naturalistic model of origins/development.  The Bible teaches a personal Creator who supernaturally created everything abruptly, and functionally mature.

You can believe God or you can believe in Evolution. Even the atheistic Evolutionists are intellectually honest enough to admit that you cannot believe Evolution AND believe the Bible.

Your line of argumentation is irrational, internally inconsistent and utterly theologically incoherent in that it requires you to abandon basic biblical doctrines about the Scriptures themselves that you later employ when you tout your faith in Jesus.

[Guest shiloh357]

On 8/20/2017 at 1:13 PM, Abdicate said:

I like how creationists are told to produce evidence of creation when the evolutionist can't produce evolution!

Evolutionist have no evidence. Evolution has no evidence to produce because all they have is an interpretation of evidence, the same set of data that creationists have.   And while we see the evidence as proof of the handiwork and the glory of God, evolutionists interpret God out of the evidence in order to avoid being accountable to an all-knowing God who has a claim on their life and will one day be their judge.

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

But the Bible presents us with a young earth.  So the problem is deciding if the Bible got it wrong and if it did, how can anything else it says be trusted?  If the Bible got it wrong right out of the gate about the length of creation, did the Bible get it wrong about the origin of sin?   Did it get it wrong about the Exodus from Egypt? How do we know that Jesus really performed miracles, if we cannot trust what the Bible says in all matters it addresses?

I would suggest that apparent conflict between "science and the Bible" is not due to the Bible, since it is the Word of God. Any apparent conflict is due to faulty human endeavors. This could be fault with the human activity of science, but the fault could also be with the human activity of theology. Young Earth Creation is only one possible interpretation of the Bible, not the only "one true" way. The Bible doesn't "get things wrong".

 

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

That's complete nonsense.   The theory of Evolution is in complete contradiction to the biblical teaching of a personal creator.  There are those who refer to themselves as "theistic evolutionists " and that is as oxymoronic as referring to oneself as an atheistic Christian.  You are one or the other.

This is easily falsified. As I have stated, I am a follower of Christ and I accept the theory of evolution, and I am far from alone. The Bible clearly teaches that belief (to the point of action) in Jesus Christ is what makes one a Christian (Romans 10:9, Acts 16:31, John 14:6, just for a few references). Implying anything else is contrary to Biblical teaching and sets a harmful example and erects unnecessary hurdles to those that do not know Christ.

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Your line of argumentation is irrational, internally inconsistent and utterly theologically incoherent in that it requires you to abandon basic biblical doctrines about the Scriptures themselves that you later employ when you tout your faith in Jesus.

My "incoherent" theology requires me to do no such thing. What doctrine do you claim I have abandoned?

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

There is no evidence for macro-Evolution. It simply doesn't exist and the theory of Evolution is based on an impersonal, wholly naturalistic model of origins/development.  The Bible teaches a personal Creator who supernaturally created everything abruptly, and functionally mature.

What are you calling "macro-Evolution"? Would you accept development of new species of "macro-Evolution", or do you have more stringent criteria? The Bible does indeed teach a personal Creator, but I would propose that the context is not as explicitly clear as you are suggesting.

One final comment, I will treat your responses with dignity and respect and ask you to do the same for a fellow follower of Christ. Remember, the fruits of the Spirit are evidence of His guidance in your life.

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, Cobalt1959 said:

Actually, it does not.  You say you believe in Jesus Christ as Creator, but render Him to a backwater role as a bumbling idiot who just designed the most rudimentary things in terms of environment and life and that life had to "evolve" in some arbitrary way with no clear goal.

I made no such claims, those words are yours, not mine. I believe in a supremely powerful and creative God that set a miraculous process in motion that led to the development of all manner of living creatures, culminating one that He designed to have the ability to commune with Him.

 

1 hour ago, Cobalt1959 said:

God, as an all-knowing and all-powerful Designer would simply create life and the environment that life occupied exactly as He meant it to be from the very beginning.  As God, there would be no need for Him to create our universe as something that had to evolve.

I agree 100% with this. There was certainly no need to create through evolution, just as there was no need to create in 6 precise 24-hour periods. It just happens that what God has revealed of His work suggests the former, and not the latter.

 

1 hour ago, Cobalt1959 said:

The Fall caused the beginning of entropy

This is completely your assertion, there is nothing in the Bible or nature that suggests that entropy was not present at the very beginning of all things.