6 days Creation

[Enoch2021]

5 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I believe that God created through evolution.

a. 'evolution' What's that...?? Define evolution...?

b. Post the Scientific Theory of evolution...?

c. Post just TWO Formal Scientific Hypotheses then Experiments that concretized it into a REAL Scientific Theory...?

d. Post the Null Hypotheses that were Rejected/Falsified for each...?

e. Highlight The Independent Variables used in Each TEST...?

 

Quote

There is a tremendous amount of evidence in astronomy, geology, and biology that point to an earth much older than 6,000 years.

1.  There's ZERO "Scientific Evidence" because astronomy and geology aren't "SCIENCES".

2.  Most of biology is Pseudo-Science as well.

3.  The "Age" of something is outside the purview of The Scientific Method --"SCIENCE".

 

Quote

The acceptance of the science  of evolution...

We don't "Accept" things in Science, we Hypothesis TEST.  "Acceptance" is for: Propaganda States, Political 'science', 2nd Grade Story Time, and Religions.

 

regards

[Enoch2021]

4 hours ago, one.opinion said:

This is one of the reasons we can be extremely confident that the earth is billions (and not thousands) of years old.

"Light Years", eh?

One of your reasons just went by the way of the DoDo Bird.  Look Up 

All the rest are on it's Coattails. 

 

regards

[SavedOnebyGrace]

23 minutes ago, Zoltan777 said:

Lot's of information that I never heard of.

But in this case I am at the side of OEC. I believe between the earth creation and the first day there was a gap.

Regarding the plants as I said garden of Eden was different from the rest of the earth. It could possible mean that it was aged by God's glory or something but I'm tend to believe it was brought down from Heaven on the same day when man was created. The reasons for this:

1. There is no tree of life and tree of knowledge exist on earth. Where did they come from? Tree of life mentioned in the Revelation as it located in the heaven. 

2. All the fruits was enough to nourish a man. It can't be just an apple. It must be something special. 

But come back when you have time and let me know about your theory.

I think you've made an excellent point in No. 1 above for the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge.  It makes sense to me.  As for No. 2, we are entering the field of speculation here.  What you're saying makes sense. 

As for the Gap Theory, the oldest explanation goes back a few hundred years before Jesus and was written by a Jewish Rabbi.  I became a Christian after I read the Genesis account in the Dake KJV Study Bible.  A better account is in Unger's Bible Commentary for the OT (it's impossible to find now unless you find a used copy), and a very good account is in the Bible Knowledge Commentary by some folks from Dallas Theological Seminary.  It gets very controversial when you start adding in Genesis 6:1-4.  The last time I talked about that my thread got split and I just left my part to wither and die.  You can only fight willful ignorance so long.  It takes a lot out of a person.

Anyway, I'll tell you what I think anytime, but I'm thinking you've got an excellent hold of the subject and it does perfectly reconcile the Bible with science.  The two need not be at odds.

[Enoch2021]

4 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

But it's one of the first arguments I bring up with YEC.  Their pat reply is that He made things with age, like Adam. 

Stereotype Fallacy.

 

Quote

So in other words, they believe God is deliberately tricking us with scientific facts!

Incoherent Straw Man Fallacy.

Was Adam an Infant in the Garden??

 

Quote

 

The Bible says the following: God takes a dim view of deception.

 

It also says,

(2 Timothy 3:16-17) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:  {17} That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."

 

regards

[HAZARD]

People often quote this when discussing creation suggesting the six days could be six thousand years?

2 Peter 3:8, But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

That with God a thousand years is like a day and a day like a thousand years, God inhabits eternity and is not subject to time to get His work done before death as is the case with us (v. 8-9; Isa. 57:15; Eph. 3:11).

Isa. 57:15, For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

Eph. 3:11, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

[one.opinion]

5 minutes ago, Enoch2021 said:

"Light Years", eh?

One of your reasons just went by the way of the DoDo Bird.  Look Up 

All the rest are on it's Coattails. 

 

regards

Sorry, but light years of distance does indeed mean that it took light that long to travel to earth. An astronomical event 10 light years distant took place 10 years ago. Your dispute of this does not invalidate it. (I'm going out of order here, but I'll be posting on your previous reply shortly.)

[Kevinb]

2 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Anyway, I'll tell you what I think anytime, but I'm thinking you've got an excellent hold of the subject and it does perfectly reconcile the Bible with science.  The two need not be at odds.

From a purely scientific standpoint the 2 are at odds. A virgin birth is a claim against biology. You'd need to demonstrate this miracle. Incidentally aren't miracles in this way by definition going against the understanding of science else it wouldn't be a miracle. I need to suspend the laws of nature and physics to believe the order of genesis. This is why it's not scientically supported. Day and night 4 days before the sun etc. 

[Enoch2021]

4 hours ago, da_man1974 said:

I am reading the book by Hugh Ross called a matter days.  

Did you get to the "Moon Fossils" part yet??   

 

Quote

It gets pretty deep but brings up some good points and evidence for why he believes in an old earth creation.

1.  Keyword: 'believes'.

2.  Does he have any Scientific Evidence, per adventure? 

 

Quote

I have also noticed as he points out in his book that I get a lot of negative and down right rude feedback from YEC when I speak of this subject.

Well probably because of his Mind Numbing adherence to Fairytale 'mainstream science', Eisegesis, and his failure to recognize his Ipso Facto Denial of the Doctrine of Salvation; For starters.

 

regards

[SavedOnebyGrace]

21 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

I've heard and seen these creationist debunks... been around years. The 2nd law of thermodynamics isn't proof either..a common creationist misconception. Done this many times but please explain how the 2nd law of thermodynamics proves God did it. Philosophical arguments are proof and evidence now?  Seriously? 

You are seeker.  That's good, I was too.  For starters, I am an old Earth Creationist.  The debunks you're probably referring to are probably young Earth Creationist.  Big difference.  So if the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics can be debunked, prove it.

Quote

The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy can only increase over time for an isolated system, meaning a system which neither energy nor matter can enter or leave. The total entropy can remain constant in ideal cases where the system is in a steady state (equilibrium) or undergoing a reversible process. The increase in entropy accounts for the irreversibility of natural processes, and the asymmetry between future and past.

In layman's terms you cannot create a perpetual motion machine.

[Enoch2021]

6 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Sorry, but light years of distance does indeed mean that it took light that long to travel to earth.

 

Sorry, it doesn't...

 

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 andRECORDED 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

 

Quote

An astronomical event 10 light years distant took place 10 years ago.

Scientifically Validate...

a. What Phenomenon was Observed...?

b. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...?

c. Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?

d. Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

 

Quote

Your dispute of this does not invalidate it.

1.  It does, Comprehensively.

2.  And 'Na'ahh" isn't a coherent argument or position.

 

Quote

(I'm going out of order here, but I'll be posting on your previous reply shortly.)

I can't wait.

 

regards