can I post this here?

[IslandRose]

We all ( evolutionists and creationists) have the same evidence. The difference is the interpretation of the evidence. I choose to interpret the evidence with a Biblical World view.

There are many things that can account for the Carbon 14 dating discrepancies. If I have a candle burning in a room with the windows closed, th e candle will burn at one rate, but if i open a window allowing a bit of a breeze, that will affect the rate at which the candle burns. Many things can affect the rate of decay of carbon 14.

One thing that could have affected it was the noahic flood. We believe there was a vapor canopy. It caused a literal "greenhouse effect" protecting the earth from harmful radiation, and giving the whole planet a uniform environment. The condensation of this canopy, causing the 40 days of rain, and the extreme pressure of the flood, could very well have affected the rate of decay. Also there are many assumptions made by scientist in setting up the parameters for dating, for instance, the assumption that rock samples contained no argon-40 when they were formed.

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

Joel, there is no rhetoric here, just an assumption on your part.

Does it offend you that I am a Fundamentalist?

Be Blessed dear brother.

Peace,

Dave

[apothanein kerdos]

Joel, there is no rhetoric here, just an assumption on your part.

How is it not rhetoric?

You stated:

I'm counting on God to be Right and mankind (ie; Science) to be wrong.

How is that not a backhand to those of us that accept scientific dating of the world and the universe?

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

No backhand was meant, I was merely stating my personal opinion in light of the question asked. This is an open discussion forum brother.

If I had stated that Joels opinion was schlock and that you should probably discount it, you might have a logical argument. What I did do was state my opinion and my Faith in God and His Word.

I do not see you taking offense at any other opinion expressed here.

As I have said, this is probably not the best way to approach the OP's question. She sincerely sought an answer and neither you or I can give it to her. She can evaluate our opinions and weigh them in Light of Gods revealed Word. Praying and seeking His face. I personally would prefer that, it is how I arrive at the Truth.

Peace,

Dave

[apothanein kerdos]

Grace to you,

No backhand was meant, I was merely stating my personal opinion in light of the question asked. This is an open discussion forum brother.

If I had stated that Joels opinion was schlock and that you should probably discount it, you might have a logical argument. What I did do was state my opinion and my Faith in God and His Word.

I do not see you taking offense at any other opinion expressed here.

As I have said, this is probably not the best way to approach the OP's question. She sincerely sought an answer and neither you or I can give it to her. She can evaluate our opinions and weigh them in Light of Gods revealed Word. Praying and seeking His face. I personally would prefer that, it is how I arrive at the Truth.

Peace,

Dave

So it's okay if I say, "It's my opinion that anyone that believes in a 6 day creation theory is a nut-job that ignores science and doesn't know the first thing about interpreting God's Word"? That's really okay?

Personal opinion or not, it wasn't good of you to say. I hold respect for 6 Day creationists so long as they return that respect and don't make outlandish statements, as you did.

The reason I'm not going after any other opinions here is because none of them take pot shots at fellow believers that disagree on a translation. IslandRose offered up a belief I disagree with, but there is no reason to respond. She didn't tell me that I was following man and not God.

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

Joel, where is the outlandish statement from me?

I didn't call you a nut job or denigrate your opinion.

She didn't tell me that I was following man and not God.

And neither did I, although it is clear you believe I did or took it that way.

Put away your Sword brother. It was given you for the enemy not your brethren. The fight is out in front of you, not side to side.

As for me, I will not contribute any longer to the turning of this thread into a vehicle for debate.

The OP has my sincere apologies. I pray she finds the Truth.

Peace,

Dave

[apothanein kerdos]

Grace to you,

Joel, where is the outlandish statement from me?

I didn't call you a nut job or denigrate your opinion.

She didn't tell me that I was following man and not God.

And neither did I, although it is clear you believe I did or took it that way.

Put away your Sword brother. It was given you for the enemy not your brethren. The fight is out in front of you, not side to side.

As for me, I will not contribute any longer to the turning of this thread into a vehicle for debate.

The OP has my sincere apologies. I pray she finds the Truth.

Peace,

Dave

Again, by saying:

"I'm counting on God to be Right and mankind (ie; Science) to be wrong."

you insulted anyone that doesn't adhere to a 6 day view of the universe. That is what you specifically stated Dave. Try as you might to twist your way out of it, that is what you said. If you didn't mean it that way, then I'll accept that. However, if you didn't mean it that way then you certainly chose poor wording.

I didn't expect you would apologize for it, but it certainly needed to be pointed out that the comment you made was highly uncalled for.

[Floatingaxe]

I like the "gap" theory myself. It clears a lot of it up for you!

[Babylove]

I'm so sorry. I didn't mean for this post to become a debate.

While I was searching the internet to learn more about creation, I found out that in the Hebrew text (original text the old testiment was written in) the use of the word 'day' in reference to those seven days can only possibly mean a literal 24h human day. I have always thought that the world really is millions (or billions, whatever it is supposed to be) of years old, and when the bible states that God made *this* one day and *that* another, it really meant one day in the life of God...and since God had no beginning and will have no end, one day to him may be the equivilent of hundreds of millions of years to us, which would seem to support that God created the earth through evolution, so therefore the theory of God creating the earth and evolution are both right. Then I found out the above (Hebrew word used for day can only literally mean one day) and I have been questioning and trying to find support that maybe the earth isn't really hundreds of millions of years old. It is possible that this isn't true, though, because I only read this on one website, and I know that not everything on the internet is actually true. Has anyone else heard that the Hebrew word used for 'day' during the creation can only possibly refer to seven literal human days?

I have heard of another reason why some people think the earth really was created in seven literal days. I have heard of some people saying there was no death at all (ie nothing living including all animals and plants died) until Adam sinned. Does anyone know of any scriptures that will support this? I can't find where it says in the bible that no animals died before Adam sinned because:

Genesis 3:22 "He (man) must not be allowed to take fruit from the tree that gives life, eat it, and live for ever"

Genesis 1:29-30 "I have provided all kinds of grain and all kinds of fruit for you to eat; but for all the wild animals and for all the birds I have provided grass and leafy plants for food"

To me, that means the only way Adam and Eve could live forever was by eating the fruit of life, and no animal would eat the fruit of life because fruit was only made for humans to eat, so I don't understand how there could have been no death at all until Adam and Eve sinned.

So far, I have been able to find answers to support that it really is possible that the world was literally created in seven actual days (not saying it actually did happen this way, but it can be possible) but I just can't find an answer to the question in my original post.

Something I did learn about carbon dating, is that every thing that is alive at the same time (ie everything that is living now) has exactly the same amount of carbon in them, and the age of a fossil can be determined by the carbon's half life (very crude I know, but I'm just touching on the basics right now) So, if it is true that the original text for the bible states that God created everything on the earth in seven literal days, every living thing that is alive at the same time has exactly the same amount of carbon in it, and dinosaurs lived at the same time as humans, it just doesn't make sense to me that there would not be even one example of a dinosaur fossil being carbon dated as living at the same time as even one human fossil.

I know I could just say that this is the way God made things and blindly accept that it is true, but I believe that God does not want us to blindly follow him but to fully study and properly understand why we are believing what is in the bible. In this case, I might just have to accept the answer 'because that's what God said' because I'm pretty sure I am never going to find the answer to this question, but generally I like to find answers to my questions because (among other reasons) I find that I have always been able to find possible answers to my questions that can follow what the bible says, and finding these answers helps to strengthen my belief and better understand God's Word.

[larryt]

I'm going to ask a question here about the bible because it is something that has been bugging me for a while and I simply cannot find the answer to it anywhere. I understand, though, if this post is removed since I don't have the required 100 posts that will allow me to put this question in the correct forum.

If God really did make the world in seven literal days, how do you account for carbon dating that states plants and animals lived hundreds of millions of years before the very first human? (this isn't my actual question, please bear with me, I am just using this to start what I have to say)

I did some research on carbon dating, and a lot of sites do state that it is really not completely reliable, but, that still doesn't answer something. Even though it may not be completely reliable, why is it, then, that every single last dinasaur fossil can be carbon dated to be much, much older than every single last human fossil? If carbon dating is so unreliable that it can be dismissed, and in actual fact humans did exist when dinasaurs existed, then wouldn't there have been AT LEAST ONE instance where a dinasaur fossil wasn't carbon dated as being much, much older than a human fossil?

I've tried searching for this and posting this in the spirituality section of another forum I am a member of, but I just can't find the answer. Every site I read says that 'carbon dating is inaccurate, dinosaurs did not really live millions of years before the first human but they actually lived at the same time as humans, and they are actually mentioned in the bible' but that still doesn't explain why ALL dinosaur fossils can be carbon dated as living millions of years before ALL human fossils.

Thanks for any help. I hope I'm not overstepping my bounds by asking this question here before I have access to the proper forum.

Hi Babylove,

Carbon dating has one major flaw that causes the unreliability.

It only would work if the environment is saturated. C14 is made by radiation in the upper atmosphere and breaks down over time. The saturation point is when the same amount is being made as is decaying but that hasn't happened yet. To this date more is being produced than decays which tells us that the saturation point has not been reached. At current rates the saturation point would take 25,000 yrs. but since it has not reached that point it is less than 25,000 yrs since it started to occur.

Good book that you may be able to find is Creation - Evolution: The Controversy by Wysong.

LT