Old Earth...Truth or Lie ?

[Guest arkon]

heh

"In the beginning...."

That sums it up.

This idea that you present when you said

What if God created Adam and Eve's physical form through evolution.....

is, like you said, unbiblical.

God said he created man in His image. All of creation was done in 6 days.

All the fossil evidence confirms the disasters spoken of in the bible.

As for nebulas post,....you should know your bible history better. Your assumptions are incorrect.

[Bread_of_Life]

God said he created man in His image.

Presumably not his physical image though, as God doesn't have a physical image (he doesn't have arms and legs and eyes etc, he is non-physical). Therefore this passage clearly refers to Him creating us in his spiritual image - I though that was uncontraversial within the Christian community.

All of creation was done in 6 days.

So your interpretation says.

All the fossil evidence confirms the disasters spoken of in the bible.

Unfortunately for you this is incorrect. However, if you want to start another thread on it, I'd be glad to hear your evidence.

[Guest arkon]

The morning and the evening were the _____ day.

There is NO interpretation. When the bible needs to be interpreted, it happens right after the vision or dream that needs it. God knew men would be like they are, so HE provided interpretations where needed. The rest is as it says.

What kind of evidence do you want? The layered earth and fossils are not enough?

[BobTriez]

It makes a whole lot more sense to figure there are missing generations in the record.

Jesus quoted the book of Genesis 25 times throughout the New Testament....if He trusts it, I do ( I'm not about to call Him a liar ). Obviously one of us is wrong....Jesus or science.

I'd check out John 5:46-47 as well Nebula.....

From the words of Jesus -

John 5:46-47

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

and if you can't, then it's time to dump the religion

Nope....no can do, and no will do......SA, it's obvious that you and I will never agree because you and I put our faith in different places....so I leave you with these two verses...

Psalm 53

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Joshua 24

15 But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD ."

And as I said at the beginning, I'm not going to spend a great deal of time trying to prove my points...that's not what the intent of this thread was anyway.....so, I'll probably end here unless there is a specific question someone wants to ask me ( not general questions like "how do you account for xxx....etc". )

I would like to end with this though for all my brothers & sisters here -

Colossians 2:8

8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

Seems like a straightforward command to me.....

Blessings to all,

Bob

Edited May 16, 2004 by BobTriez

[Bread_of_Life]

Bob,

Thankyou for your reply, although you're still accusing me of having "faith" in things. I did reply to this accusation very early on in this dialogue - I believe because of evidence, not lacking it, or in spite of it.

If I believe that the earth is 5 billion years old, it is because I have a lot of evidence that this is so - not because I have "faith" in what scientists tell me, or some religious adherence to an old earth. I would thank you therefore to not accuse me of this in the future.

Nik

[BobTriez]

Bob,

Thankyou for your reply, although you're still accusing me of having "faith" in things. I did reply to this accusation very early on in this dialogue - I believe because of evidence, not lacking it, or in spite of it.

If I believe that the earth is 5 billion years old, it is because I have a lot of evidence that this is so - not because I have "faith" in what scientists tell me, or some religious adherence to an old earth. I would thank you therefore to not accuse me of this in the future.

Nik

The faith I'm referring to with you is faith in the scientific community Nik....have you done ALL the research ? Have you personally collected and viewed ALL the evidence ? Or are you trusting in what you learned in school through books....if so - be it anything you haven't personally proven yourself, that would fit the definition of faith ( faith does not necessarily have to be in a religious sense you know )....I'll leave it at that though per your request.

I'll no more abandon my Bible than you your evidence at this point in your life.....shake and move on Nik ? 'cuz we're just spinning our tyres at this point...aren't we ?

Blessings,

Bob

[Bread_of_Life]

The faith I'm referring to with you is faith in the scientific community Nik

In fact, I don't even have faith in this. That is why I expect experiments to be independently repeated, and subjected to thorough peer review. Scientists have been known to lie, or fudge, or fake. In fact, by repeating experiments and observations, and by peer review, these people do get found out, and immediately ejected from the scientific community.

have you done ALL the research ?

This is a senseless question, since you already know the answer is "no". Of course I have not performed every single experiment known to man in every field, far less in the field of radiometric dating. There are literally thousands of samples dated every year.

Have you personally collected and viewed ALL the evidence ?

Again, of course I havn't. I have already seen enough evidence, from independent sources and also from my own lab (or else, the lab I studied at before leaving university), to be thoroughly convinced in the effectiveness of radiometric dating.

I also have a strong theoretical understand of radiometric dating - not only of the methods involved but also of the underlying physics of decay processes and nucleonic forces. This means that I can also know that the methods that I have seen working experimentally, and have been reported to work independently many more times than I have personally seen them work, also work out theoretically.

if so - be it anything you haven't personally proven yourself, that would fit the definition of faith

So, therefore, does anything for which you havn't seen every single last piece of evidence yourself count as a "faith" belief? For example, I havn't seen every single last piece of evidence that my fiancee exists - after all, there is plenty of evidence for this before I knew her - does this mean I can only claim to have faith that she exists?

Faith is defined as a belief without sufficient evidence or proof - not as a belief without absolute or complete evidence or proof. My knowledge and experience of the evidence for an old earth may be limited, but it is certainly *sufficient* to draw a very firm conclusion that the earth is in fact old.

[nebula]

As for nebulas post,....you should know your bible history better. Your assumptions are incorrect.

Explain, please!

Thanks!

[Guest arkon]

And in between Noah and Abraham was enough time to establish several powerful countries,

First, God blessed Noah and his sons and told them to fill the earth.

They did not however take off and start building cities and nations.

This was the cause of a problem.

They stayed put though.

Until Nimrod. Nimrod was a 'mighty hunter before the Lord. Nimrod was NOT a nice man. Nimrod is the 'Father' of the unholy trnity of Nimrod, his mother, and their son Tammuz. Nimrod, aka sungod.

Anyway, until Babel, (and except for a few pioneers that Im sure went and explored the wilderness) the people stayed there in the fertile valley that is still in headlines today.

When God confused the tongues and scattered the people, they carried with them the things they knew in sumeria. The egyptian religion mirrors that of sumeria. So do the greek, roman, and norse. Hopi indians have some amazing similarities with sumeria as well. The point is, that people didnt spread out and then build. They stayed put and learned and multiplied , and were then scattered.

This is recorded in many cultural legends around the world in the form of migration stories and creation stories that are seemingly straight out of genesis (with a few name changes).

[His son]

Bob,

This tells me that nothing died prior to the fall. And subsequent to the fall, creation also suffers. Following the genealogies in Genesis we can trace the fall of man back to about 6000 years. That means anything ( dead ) dating back prior to the fall of man simply is un Biblical.

I've heard this one before. I'm no biblical scholar of course, and I don't want to get too involved in biblical argument because I am really here to explain the scientific data. However, I have heard one answer to this that you might not have considered.

What if God created Adam and Eve's physical form through evolution, then, once the physical creation was perfected, God suspended death and gave Adam and Eve a soul and spirit. Then, when Adam and Eve sinned against God, their spirits died, and death re-entered the world as it had been when it was being perfected?

I know that there is no explicit backing for this in the bible - but I also know that the bible does not explicitely rule it out either.

Anyway, no matter what the bible says, I (along with every single other credible scientist that I know) am certain beyond any reasonable doubt that things lived and died as long back as 3.7 billion years ago, long before man ever walked the earth, and before all the Genesis genealogies. There are literally vast swathes of evidence that this is the case, in fact, all the paleontological evidence we encounter confirms this fact. So, essentially, you're gonna have to get used to it, and accomodate it into your religion somehow - and if you can't, then it's time to dump the religion, cos the fossils arn't going to disappear.

You say you have scientific evidence. That is a deception that you have bought from data manufactured by worldly science that has an agenda of leading all they can away from God.

If you are sincere about wanting scientific proof about creation, you need to do a study first of all of the history of science. This would show you that the men who created all the different facets of science were Christians who believed in The Bible account of the 6 day creation. This tells us then that the science you are believing in is in the same catagory as churches who follow false doctrines, and therefore tend to lead people away from the Truth. The scientists of today are abandining the evolution theory by the numbers because the real scientists have proven, and have the proof both of fossil evidence, and the strata of the earth. They have proven that the carbon dating method is a fabrication. This is from scientists, so if you are going to come and present scientific information I would suggest that you present both sides or at least state that it is your opinion and not as scientific fact, which will not hold up in light of all the facts. And then you further compound your error by telling the creationists that they are privately interpreting The Bible, when it is written in such a manner that the 6 days of creation need no interpretation what soever. In your name you call yourself an atheist. I would ask you are you really an atheist? If you are it means that you don't believe in anything, and you have already stated a belief in false evidence of a false doctrine.