Posted on 02/08/2009 3:10:04 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Do you feel better now that you’ve had your rant?
What is not open for debate is that the universe is at least 10 - 15 billion years old. And what is not open for debate is that the speed of light has been established and verified at 186,000 miles per hr.
When you make assertions like the above, what else is there to assume? Hence my question "What are the Big Bang assertions/assumptions about the speed of light and the mass of the universe in the first 1 second of the "event"?" Reckon how old the universe appeared 1 year after this "explosion". In my mind, this causes significant concern for the assertions about the universe's "age".
The scripture mentions 10 times of the LORD "stretching" out the heavens, to wit:
Isaiah 45:12 It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts.
I reckond that he stretched out the streams of light from "distant" stars in the same way, if not at the same time.
God isn’t a deciever. That’s why that argument against the age of the earth and God creating it is the epitome of a strawman if I ever saw one.
The fact that that stupid argument keeps getting trotted out by the evos shows a major disconnect in their reasoning ability.
Since the position that God put stuff there just to deceive mankind is just so ludicrous, then clearly it is wrong and should be discarded for the crap it is. Then one needs to look for other reasons that things seem to indicate an older earth than making up some kind of nonsense argument and defeating it, thinking that you’ve proved something to your opponents.
You’ve proved something alright, but not what you’re thinking.
In your dreams.
Just for kicks, would you like to provide some sources to back up your contention, like any good scientist should do?
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
So much material, so little time......
Only if you want it to be that way. It doesn't have to be and isn't for many of us Christians who are scientists.
Exposing liberalism is good for eveyone.
So what? Newton was practicing the accepted science of the day. That's all.
I've seen nothing in Scripture that indicates that that can happen, so his belief in alchemy can not be connected to his belief in God or the Bible.
His belief in alchemy doesn't cut into his credibility in other scientific areas. Why disparage him for not knowing something that we know now? That's intellectually dishonest.
GGG was talking about interpretation.
Sure the universe is currently observable and people write down what they observe, just like you say the ancients did.
If the writings of the authors of the NT are to be discredited because of what they may have observed, that should hold true for ALL accounts of anything. Recording it as it happens is no guarantee of increased accuracy anyway.
Sophistry isn’t.
And why couldn't that have taken several billion years.
It is you who are making assumptions.
You state that known facts are not true because your interpretation of Genesis conflicts with reality.
As for the quote "Isaiah 45:12 It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts."
Where does that give any time paramters?
Facts are facts. Adjust your interpretation of the bible to match reality, else you'll be delusional.
I believe you’ve got it.
You’re right.
Bottom line, to paraphrase a terrific Seinfeld episode, I’m not offended because I’m a fallen-away Catholic; I’m offended because the bozos don’t make any sense attacking Christianity while being reverent toward raven stories.
Nice talking with you.
"Why does Moses break the calendar into two parts - 'The days of old, and the years of the many generations?' Because, 'Consider the days of old' is the Six Days of Genesis. 'The years of the many generations' is all the time from Adam forward." --Nachmanides, 1200AD
“I believe you’ve got it.”
I’m sorry to be this way but, What comment are you referring to?
You accept Jesus on faith, don't you? The only evidence that Jesus was the son of God is the Bible and since no one can prove scientifically or otherwise that what is written in the Bible is true, it must be accepted on faith. I've never met a Christian who believed in God because someone had shown them scientifically of his existence. God is accepted as real by people who have seen the changes in their life through their faith and personal connection to God. If one could prove the existence of God scientifically faith would be unnecessary, and the most critical element in our relationship with God would be lost. A friend of mine who had struggled with drug addiction well into his 30's woke up one morning, pulled out the bible and after several days of reading and praying quit drugs for good. No one proved to him that God existed, he simply felt the powerful presence of God through prayer and the bible, and it changed his life. No scientific evidence was required. His faith is what keeps him clean.
Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Isa 53:1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
If the Bible is not to be believed about creation, it’s not to be believed.
Don’t bother answering my last post. I figured out what I got right.
“The miracles show the character of God, the sovereignty of God, the kindness of God, the power of God, the mercy of God, etc.”
That is precisely what I was trying to say, only you said it better. To sit around debating whether or not the miracles were genuine misses the larger and more important point of what God was telling us with the miracles. I believe one needs to start with the belief that Jesus was the son of God. If that is accepted everything he did is true. If one tries to accept Jesus was the son of God because he performed miracles I think the point is missed. Jesus didn’t perform miracles to prove he was the son of God, but to demonstrate the character of God as you pointed out.
I’ve read your post to me several times. Frankly I’m not sure what you are saying.
Can you try again.
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.