Dennis1209 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 18 Topic Count: 347 Topics Per Day: 0.13 Content Count: 7,481 Content Per Day: 2.70 Reputation: 5,384 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/27/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted December 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Matter time and space all came into existence at the same time. The Bible tells us that God created the earth in 6 24 hour days, and we know that because of the modifiers of "evening to morning" which on a lunar calendar (which is the calendar in use when the Bible Genesis was written), would have covered a 24 hour time period as opposed to "morning to evening" (on a solar calendar). Okay that's logical and reasonable. So light was a separate and distinct creation, and not part of time, matter and space creation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis1209 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 18 Topic Count: 347 Topics Per Day: 0.13 Content Count: 7,481 Content Per Day: 2.70 Reputation: 5,384 Days Won: 1 Joined: 09/27/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted December 23, 2017 11 hours ago, missmuffet said: No, I don't buy it Quasar. It gets too much into evolution for me. You gots it missmuffet! The only evolution is adaptation to their environments by some species. It must make evolutionists feel all warm and fuzzy inside, knowing their great, great gandpappy's were star dust, then rocks, then pond scum, then knuckle draggers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quasar93 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 651 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 236 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/06/2016 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 7 hours ago, Cobalt1959 said: I think you either fail to realize the intent of the last sentence, or you use it knowingly as a rhetorical device to infer blame on anyone who believes differently than you. Either way, it is both a very transparent tactic as well as one that is deplorable and only resorted to when one has no credible defense when met with sound refutation of their aberrant belief. As most do when their beliefs cannot be simply laid out by the use of scripture, which is the ultimate and final authority on all subjects, you post endless and biased studies that are anything but objective and actually prove nothing. God is omnipotent. So I chuckle whenever someone tries to infer that God is somehow painted into a scientific corner in regards to the age and the appearance of the earth. God was forced to create the Earth on a man-conceived time table of millions of years because He was to unable to do it any other way. That kind of defeats the concept of "all-powerful," doesn't it? For your 80-plus years of studies, and money spent on Bible Colleges, this was the best you could do? The supposed age of the earth in terms of "millions of years" is easily explained by The Flood. The Fall did not just negatively affect mankind, it also negatively affected the Earth and began the law of entropy. Universal decay, as we understand the term does not begin until that point. The Bible is abundantly clear about that. Only those who seek some other reason for the state of today's fallen world look for some other reason for the corruption of the original system God created because they buy into the lie of evolution which actually excludes the very power that created science in the first place. Highly ironic. We are led to believe that God is so selective about what knowledge His children could comprehend that he purposely delivered the Written Word in a manner so archaic and so esoteric that only a handful of very special and supposedly well-trained people could actually understand it. That there is this huge chunk of ancient history implied in a supposed gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. All based on . . . silence and lack of textual evidence. Sure, I will totally buy into that once I can learn to both suspend my disbelief and forfeit all my cognitive reasoning skills. 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. 1 Corinthians 2:14-16 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment: 16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:18-20 18 Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; 20 and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile." Your above is once again, no argument with Scriptural support, for the young earth you stand for, such as I have provided for an old earth age, but rather, a meaningless, opinionated attack on me personally. Quasar93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 36 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said: Okay that's logical and reasonable. So light was a separate and distinct creation, and not part of time, matter and space creation? Apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quasar93 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 651 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 236 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/06/2016 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 7 hours ago, Cobalt1959 said: Ad hominems do little to advance your theory. It was not I who rolled out a parade of institutions you studied at as some form of bonafides as to why anyone here should just accept what you say without subjecting it to critical examination based on sound hermeneutics and simple logic. There was no personal attack. People who take Genesis as it was meant to be taken, literally, do not forward a Gap Theory. Serious biblical study does not support that notion. Gap Theory is a secular argument. Since you are the one fielding the hypothesis, the burden of proof lies with you to provide sound evidence for your hypothesis. In all actually, that is impossible to do because the theory of Lucifer's Flood and The Gap Theory rests on two weak pillars of biblical silence and interpolation of the theory on the existing text. God created a perfect world and then Lucifer messed it up. So God had to re-create it again, as perfect, again, and then man messed it up, again. God, in your scenario, just doesn't seem to be able to get the hang of this creation thing. The Bible is clear that sin and imperfection were introduced into our system by mankind, not Lucifer. Your affinity for attacking your opponent's views as a crutch for the support of your own is a complete failure. As I have previously provided Scriptural and scientific support for an old age earth refuting you. Quasar93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Quasar93 said: Your affinity for attacking your opponent's views as a crutch for the support of your own is a complete failure. As I have previously provided Scriptural and scientific support for an old age earth refuting you. Quasar93 Attacking someone's point of view is what debate is about. It's not a crutch. You have not provided anything except an article, nothing that actually stands as real evidence of any pre-adamic race. There is no evidence for that because there was no pre-adamic race. You have failed to meet your burden of proof. Edited December 23, 2017 by shiloh357 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quasar93 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 651 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 236 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/06/2016 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 7 hours ago, shiloh357 said: But again, I have not made an earth/age argument. I addressed the issue of the alleged pre-adamic flood of judgment and showed from the Hebrew that it is completely ruled out because of the "vav disjunctive." If you really are a Bible college and seminary graduate, then you had at least 12 hours of undergraduate and graduate level Hebrew and you know what I am talking about. You can't address the issue I raised, so you are trying to refute me on the basis of an argument I didn't make. But I will say this... Based on the "vav disjunctive," there was no pre-adamic world, thus no flood to judge that world, it does cut into the age of the earth being millions of years. It removes one major argument for the earth being millions of years old, given that the Gap Theory is a convenient fall back for people trying reconcile scientific claims with the Bible. The only reason we are even having any discussion on the age of the earth is because the Church allowed the atheistic scientific community hi-jack the interpretation of Scripture and now Science is the infallible standard against which the Bible is measured and Christians like you are trying to make the Bible fit what science says, rather than the Bible being the standard against which science is judged. You have made the Bible subservient to the Atheists and unbelievers. You have yet to show where any Hebrew translation, other than what I have previously posted of it, has a single thing to do in denial of the old earth age theology. In addition, show me a single article I have posted in positive support of an old earth age that comes from a single atheist! They ALL come from Christian sources! Opinion is still completely meaningless without viable support. Quasar92 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quasar93 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 651 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 236 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/06/2016 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said: Let's examine what you're saying in a bit of more detail, as far as dating the earth scientifically? Genesis 1: 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Okay, is God and heaven inside or outside of time at this point? A good case could be made that time didn't exist until Gen 1: 3, when light came about. The darkness was prevalent, most likely 'evil' in my studies? So, IF this be the case, how does one date something that existed outside of time, before it was created? Indeed, God created time for the use of mankind. However, whether time existed or not, please tell me how that effects events as to whether they occur before or after any given event? Quasar93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmbld Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,491 Content Per Day: 0.54 Reputation: 1,457 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/23/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/02/1971 Share Posted December 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Quasar93 said: Indeed, God created time for the use of mankind. However, whether time existed or not, please tell me how that effects events as to whether they occur before or after any given event? Quasar93 If time has not yet been created, how could something occur before or after an event? No time=no before or after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quasar93 Posted December 23, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 651 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 236 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/06/2016 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 29 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Attacking someone's point of view is what debate is about. It's not a crutch. You have not provided anything except an article, nothing that actually stands as real evidence of any pre-adamic race. There is no evidence for that because there was no pre-adamic race. You have failed to meet your burden of proof. 31 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Attacking someone's point of view is what debate is about. It's not a crutch. You have not provided anything except an article, nothing that actually stands as real evidence of any pre-adamic race. There is no evidence for that because there was no pre-adamic race. You have failed to meet your burden of proof. I have failed nothing in providing Scriptural and scientic evidence for an old earth age, to yout opinionated rhetoric without a shred of viable Scriptural or scientific evidence to the contrary, except to try doing so with one Hebrew word. Your ignoring the evidence provided will not sweep it under the carpet as you keep trying to do! Quasar93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts