Posted on 10/04/2005 12:21:01 PM PDT by Junior
God also "forms" babies in the womb (sorry, don't remember verses, but there are various) and that takes nine months. And He also "creates" the wind (book of Amos) and that's natural and ongoing presumably , with no "poofing" involved.
Excellent point!
I am somewhat up to date on Carbon-14. Could you explain 1) how do you know thee were changes in the speed of light and over what time period, and 2) how this impacts Carbon-14 dating?
So what's your point? That you believe it took longer than "poof" to create man? Who knows how long it took. It doesn't matter. Just because it takes 9 months for a baby to physically develop to be able to live outside the womb doesn't lend any support to the idea it took millions of years to form a man.
Well that's your opinion but it's not based on anything. Clay can be formed instantly or over time. Scripture doesn't get into those details.
I love the Scriptures. It is a joy discussing these things with you. Thank you for your comments, which I find to be perfectly in line with someone of integrity who is seeking understanding.
The Bible teaches that God is a relational God. The scriptural presentation of the Trinity reveals how God is in a relationship even within the Godhead. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. All uniquely uncreated, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent and in eternal perfect agreement acting as ONE.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:...
It is in God's perfect plan that He demonstrated His desire to be in a relationship with man, by taking on flesh and being one of us in the person of Jesus Christ. What better way to relate perfectly with One's created intelligent beings. This information about a coming Redeemer has been revealed to mankind throughout history. Both passed down orally from Adam till Moses, then permanently written down beginning with Moses.
Only recently has historical revisionism tried to rewrite history to make it seem as though the world has not known the Gospel. The Magi (there were many more than three and they weren't from the same countries) were from other lands, but were well aware of a coming King. The message has been shared with all civilizations throughout history for those with an ear to hear.
God is perfectly Just and will not let any burn if they have an excuse. The Apostle Paul lays out this truth here:
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Luk 19:39-40
39 And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
placemarker
No. His point is that there are things the Bible says are created which science tells us are formed by pure natural processes. The obvious conclusion is that God often uses natural processes to create things.
Why not evolution?
A pot cannot be formed instantly. It has to pass through intermediate shapes before it takes its final shape.
That's not my opinion. That's a fact. It may not take long to do, but the length of time is not what's relevant; it's the fact that there must be intermediate shapes.
Scripture doesn't get into those details.
On this we agree.
How could the American Indians have possibly heard the Gospel message at the time St. Paul was writing?
World's greatest salesman placemark
If you reject the notion that God explained to Adam and Eve their need for blood sacrifice demonstrated by the unacceptable offering of Cain, then you won't believe that information was handed down to all of their descendants. And you won't believe the break up of peoples because of the Tower of Babel.
Making a Mythology of the Book of Genesis makes the Scripture foolish. Adam was able to tell a lot of people what God wanted. Moses codified the message of Adam.
Dates are approximate, but I have chosen lifetimes that have clearly overlapped:
Adam------4004BC to 3074BC could have spoken to
Lamech----3160BC to 2383BC could have spoken to
Noah-------2955BC to 2005BC could have spoken to
Abraham---2035BC to 1869BC would have spoken to
Jacob-------1850BC to 1675BC could have spoken to
Esrom------1700BC to 1506BC could have spoken to
Moses------1560BC to 1440BC the penman of Genesis who was only six times removed from Adam.
Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
Gen 5:31 And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
Gen 9:29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.
Gen 25:7 And these [are] the days of the years of Abraham's life which he lived, an hundred threescore and fifteen years.
Deu 34:7 And Moses [was] an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
Well, there is the Book of Mormon...
False dichotomy. Both positions can be wrong, at least to a significant degree.
The scientific evidence for evolution is ambiguous at best. And the philosophical problems with evolution seem to me to be insurmountable, since evolutionary theory destroys universals, resulting in nominalism and ultimately solipsism, both very anti-scientific philosophies.
Nope. A pot can be formed almost instantly. There is no scriptural evidence for macro evolution.
Nowhere does the Bible say or even imply Man was created by natural processes. But if you have the faith for such a leap - instead of why not evolution - why not Christ?
Do you read that Bible a lot?
I do not know, any more than you know that it has been uniform from "the beginning"
it would only impact C14 when it would have been faster. no one was around to test that.
how would a global flood impact C14 starting points, rates of decay, leaching of C?
Not so at all, and I suspect that you know better. Given the number of separate lines of evidence from different disciplines that have converged on and reinforced the basic tenets and predicitons of the TOE, the TOE is one of the most robust theories in science at the moment. In fact, it is one of the most successful and enduring theories in the entire history of science, and despite the vapid claims of the ID crowd, there isn't even the glimmer of a competing theory of speciation on the horizon that begins to match it for its breadth and depth of explanatory power. In fact, ID isn't even a theory. It's a hypothesis that very few of its Creationist partisans seem concerned with or capable of raising to the level of a theory.
Maybe, if taken individually. However, taken as a whole, the evidence points to evolution and refutes creationism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.