Half Lives Havn't Changed

[nebula]

BobTriez - "Either the Bible is wrong or scientists are wrong....there's no other way."

Or your interpretation of the Bible is wrong.  That you do not recognize a possibility does not mean it doesn't exist.

Umm . . .

Trafficdemon . . .

Although I agree with your response, that little line you tacked on the end there just defeated your entire argument. You have stated in the other thread that you are a Christian. This line just made everyone here perceive that you are not. Ergo, why should they listen to your interpretation of the Scriptures?

Edited May 19, 2004 by Dr. Luke

[Guest Traffic Demon]

AllforJesustheLord - "Traffix demon are you just here to bring confusion, and hate"

No, just here to fight against the scientific ignorance which pervades this board, at least in my free time.

arkon - "This is sooooo stereotypical of evolutionists. (Please note that I used the label evolutionist....this is not to be confused with actual scientists ... the ones who use the scientific method...instead of faith)"

Funny, but "evolutionists" use the scientific method just as much as scientists in any other field. Do a little research on the topic and you'll see it for yourself.

"How about this. His interpretation of the bible is correct."

Of course it is, but you have not shown that your interpretation is His interpretation.

"God did not make the bible complicated."

Nor did He make His Word inconsistent with His Creation as you insist.

"YOUR interpretation of the facts is what is wrong."

This ought to be good.

"Fossils are evidence of Noahs flood and the dispertion during pelegs day"

Then why do we see the perfectly chronologically sorted fossil record that we do, instead of the hodgepodge that a global flood would created? Why do we see zero evidence that a global flood ever occurred? Why do we make so many observations that we could not make if such an event ever occurred? The answer is simple, that a global flood never occurred.

"The layers of earth are from the same. The nonconformities are a result of the division during pelegs day."

Funny, but it looks like the young Earth creationists are insisting on geological activity orders of magnitude more severe than the "evolutionists" are! Priceless!

nebula - "Although I agree with your response, that little line you tacked on the end there just defeated your entire argument."

Take it easy, it was a ref to a Chili Peppers album, nothing more. If somebody is going to dismiss the validity of my argument based on a signature, then they are basing their conclusion on something entirely unrelated, and are only showing that they have no interest in an honest discussion of the topic.

"You have stated in the other thread that you are a Christian. This line just made everyone here perceive that you are not."

Taste in music is hardly a determining factor of one's salvation. If it were, we shouldn't expect to see too many country music fans in heaven

"Ergo, why should they listen to your interpretation of the Scriptures?"

Because that interpretation remains valid whether they like my sig or not.

--Y2Traf

Go too far

[Bread_of_Life]

Bob et al,

Again I'll say it, I'm not a biblical scholar, so I can hardly pretend to be able to answer Bob's points on the biblical narrative.

However, I do know a thing or two about the earth, and the evidence we find therein. I also know that there are three sorts of revelation - personal (through the spirit), scriptural (through the bible), and general (through the world, universe etc).

If these 3 are in conflict, then there's gotta be something wrong with your religious beliefs - they should all be broadly aligned, saying the same thing. Now, we're talking here about a conflict between two forms of revelation, scriptural and general.

Bob says that according to scripture (or else, according to his interpretation of scripture), the earth is about 6000 years old, so is life, and there was no death before the fall. However, the earth says something very very different. The earth is testament, in every single rock, with every single fossil, with every single living being, that the earth is about 5 billion years old, and life (in some form) around 3.7 billion years old. The fossil record also shows us that, in that time, life has changed. It also says that human beings evolved through a series of intermediate forms from ape-like ancestors. As well as the fossil record, we have a treasure trove of information in our DNA that confirms these facts.

I would submit that the evidence is not going away. Even if we destroy every fossil we have, we will simply discover more. Even if we burn every book on DNA, it will similarly be re-discovered. The evidence that pays testament to the antiquity of the earth and life, and changes therein, will remain long after the human race has gone extinct, and every religion if forgotten.

Therefore, since the evidence isn't going to change (but rather, more evidence will be gathered!) - the only remaining option (other than rejecting Christianity, which is always an option) is to change the interpretation of scripture to bring it into line with the physical evidence.

[Guest mscoville]

Atheist,

What do you say to books by non Christians like "Darwin's Black Box (the biochemical challenge to evolution)"? I've not read it. But I've heard it's convincing.

Have a good one,

Martin

[nebula]

nebula - "Although I agree with your response, that little line you tacked on the end there just defeated your entire argument."

Take it easy, it was a ref to a Chili Peppers album, nothing more. If somebody is going to dismiss the validity of my argument based on a signature, then they are basing their conclusion on something entirely unrelated, and are only showing that they have no interest in an honest discussion of the topic.

"You have stated in the other thread that you are a Christian. This line just made everyone here perceive that you are not."

Taste in music is hardly a determining factor of one's salvation. If it were, we shouldn't expect to see too many country music fans in heaven

"Ergo, why should they listen to your interpretation of the Scriptures?"

Because that interpretation remains valid whether they like my sig or not.

--Y2Traf

Go too far

No, your taste in music has nothing to do with this argument. However, showing yourself to be aligned with such as that does make an impression on people as to the character of your faith. If you are going to take a stand that is contrary to "mainline Christian thinking," you really ought to be careful to "show yourself approved" in matters of faith and Christian living. Red Hot Chili Peppers have a reputation for perversion.

I hope you realize, I speak this as an instructor, not as someone trying to shoot down your arguments.

[Guest arkon]

Then why do we see the perfectly chronologically sorted fossil record that we do, instead of the hodgepodge that a global flood would created? Why do we see zero evidence that a global flood ever occurred? Why do we make so many observations that we could not make if such an event ever occurred? The answer is simple, that a global flood never occurred.

I never noticed the date stamp on the fossils. Why do we see trees fossilized through a coal bed, then into the layer above it, and then into the next coal bed above that? Arent coal beds supposed to be anceint swamps that were around for millions of years and then covered over by desert ?

Hydrolic sorting. Try it out.

And yes...I do say that the disaster is greater than anything put forth by evolutionists. Look down the list of topics in Apologetics and read the "Noah, Babel, Peleg" post.

[Guest mscoville]

Cerran, I hope you're not around because you're writing.

[Guest mscoville]

Although Yod could answer my questions also and It would be fine.

[Guest yod]

God creates the Heavens and the Earth and light on that first day. And he tells us, there was morning and evening the first day (Gen 1:5). That refers to the twenty four hour day and evening day that you and I know so well. Not a millennium as our brother Yod will state. We know this because of the "CONTEXT" of day and evening the first day. I challenge any old earth creationist to show me another example in Genesis, where day is meant to mean a long age and yet in context reads as a single 24 hour day.

oy....I'll repeat myself for the sake of showing I'm not afraid of your "evidence" but this is the last time

how do you get a 24 hour period before the sun and moon? I never said it was a millennium...it was probably much longer.

Many times the expression is used "in that day....." or "the day of _______" where it is talking about an age...an epoch....a time greater than 24 hours.

There is no sensable reason to FORCE A CONTRADICTION by saying the days of creation were 24 hours when all it takes is altering your interpretation of the word "yom" to make the evidence line up with the biblical text. I didn't become a believer because I wanted dogma. I was on a search for truth that can be proven. Jesus is Truth because I have verified with all the evidence that He came, died on cross for sin (just as foretold by the Bible over previous centuries) and was resurrected. I trust Him alone.

New earth followers make this into a divisive dogma and then go about stirring up strife and being offended that people won't suspend the use of their brains.

You can believe that God is a celestial chicken if you think the "Shadow of His Wings" means He has feathers.

It doesn't matter to me what you think. This is soooooo unimportant and unfruitful.

[Guest mscoville]

Yod,

Jesus is Truth because I have verified with all the evidence that He came, died on cross for sin (just as foretold by the Bible over previous centuries) and was resurrected. I trust Him alone.

New earth followers make this into a divisive dogma and then go about stirring up strife and being offended that people won't suspend the use of their brains.

I can't believe how insulting you like to make your posts brother. "Suspend the use of their brains", "Idiots." All things I've read in your posts. You didn't answer a single question I asked. I think it only proves my point, the scientific old earth/evolution view doesn't work with scripture. Where did sin arise from? Was there death before it? Answer some of these issues. I want to understand it, but your reading of Yom is absurd and totally out of context and it seems to me that brain suspension is not something you should sling unless you know I'm not honestly trying to reconcile the issue. Which you don't. If the Yom translation thing is all you've got, you're the one who hasn't thought this through very well.

God Bless you,

Martin