6000 year old earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter YosefYosep
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Judas_Thaddeus said:
Well first, “creationist scientists” is an oxymoron. Creationists do not USE science, yes they look at the same evidence, but NOT the same data, form their models based on the “literal interpretation” of Scripture, completely avoiding serious research and SCIENCE.

Again, I insist that you do you’re own research outside Creationist sources, but I will provide to videos with information which you can use in you’re studies:
youtube.com/watch?v=UIijwkaqKzY
youtube.com/watch?v=kfTbrHg8KGQ

Come on, get a library card.
Click to expand...
And they will continue to be creationists regardless of what is posted here. This type of thread will be repeated, in some form, here - endlessly.

Peace,
Ed
 
clem456 said:
Anyone who wants to debate this question should be required to take a basic 100 level geology class.
The Church is very wise to have respect for science and reason. And it is also very wise in not seeing the need to make infallible pronouncements about the innumerable issues that science has given clear cut answers to…
like whether the earth revolves around the sun or vice versa, or whether there is actually a dome above us holding the waters back, or whether the earth is 6000 years old.

God gave us eyes, ears, a brain…to be used well.
Click to expand...
Your wish will not be granted.

"The Time Question

“Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”

Source: Catholic Answers tract

Peace,
Ed
 
rossum said:
Recall that we have different definitions of “universe”. The current STEM definition of universe is not eternal. Other definitions of “universe” are different. In particular the Buddhist/Hindu universe is eternal, alternating mixed material and spiritual phases with purely spiritual phases. The STEM universe is the current mixed phase.

Your definition of Eternal is also different it seems, I am referring to a perpetual universe which is impossible on many levels including the second law of thermodynamics.
Does STEM = science, technology, engineering and mathematics? I have not seen any other STEM reference to the universe.
So in your Spiritual phase where does the material go before it comes back again?

As in so many things, you are incorrect here.
**Sincere apologies, I took this assumption from your little maxims statement that you feel good all the time. But what many other things have I been incorrect about?
You are the one who does not address all the questions I have posed?
**

Show me a 2000 year old contemporary of Christ and I might believe the prophecy to be correct.
What about the others I referred to?

You might also find some Jewish websites interesting, particularly those dealing with the prophecies of the Messiah.
I do indeed and understand well that their misunderstanding was also long ago prophesised and they will only be free from this misunderstanding at the Rapture of the committed Church **They do not catch the fact that there were to be two Messianic visitations, the first as a Lamb and the second as a Lion. They were hoping for the Lion when Jesus arrived
**

rossum
Click to expand...
Plenty of questions there for you, Hope you can answer them all
 
edwest2 said:
Your wish will not be granted.

"The Time Question

“Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”

Source: Catholic Answers tract

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Yes. And?
The Church has not infallibly defined when the earth was formed. Why would it? There are innumerable things the Church does not make pronouncements on. The Church does not do scientific research. The important thing in the Church’s eyes evidently is that God created all things from nothing. And the Church does not hold that truth to be incompatible with the mountain of scientific research that says the earth is about 4.5 billion years old. It simply doesn’t say anything about it, because it is in the realm of science.

Which brings us to my original comment that anyone who wants to debate this needs to have an entry level geology course. The idea that the earth could be 6000 years old defies common sense and reason IF one is at all acquainted with basic science. If one is not, then the discussion is pointless and one is certainly free to believe whatever one wants, but that doesn’t make it a reasonable belief.

Everyone needs to see the Grand Canyon once, and just contemplate the marvelous processes God has put in motion for something like that to form, and the time required for it to happen. It took millions of years for that to happen. If you doubt it, go out to your nearest river and stare at it for 6000 years and see how little the landscape changes, then compare it to the huge erosion project called the Grand Canyon.
 
Freekevio said:
Your definition of Eternal is also different it seems, I am referring to a perpetual universe which is impossible on many levels including the second law of thermodynamics.
Click to expand...
The SLoT applies to the material, not to the spiritual. In a universe where the material alternates with the spiritual, the SLoT is not applicable during the spiritual phases.
Does STEM = science, technology, engineering and mathematics?
Click to expand...
No, in this context STEM = Space, Time, Energy, Matter. My apologies for not explaining. Basically, STEM is the material universe of science that we live in.
So in your Spiritual phase where does the material go before it comes back again?
Click to expand...
Ask Brahma, not me; I am not a god. There are many questions that the Buddha did not answer because they were a distraction from the path. Your question is one such.
What about the others I referred to?
Click to expand...
What about them? One failed prophecy is enough to cast reasonable doubt on the whole. There are difficulties with Matthew 16:27-28 as well.
I do indeed and understand well that their misunderstanding …
Click to expand...
The problem I have is that you tell me that they are misunderstanding the text, while they say that you are misunderstanding the text. At the very least, the meaning of the text is obviously unclear. An unclear text cannot be relied upon for prophecies, as Harold Camping found to his cost.

rossum
 
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/nun_slapping_ruler_hg_clr-1.gif
*** http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/closed-1.gif***
*** Be advised that this thread is precisely*** why it is under a banned topics moratorium.
*** Sticky***: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads
*** For those who want to see what the Church actually teaches in these matters (and what it does not) I suggest you take a careful look at the following from the Ask An Apologist forum. ***
*** ***What exactly is the Church’s teaching on the theory of evolution?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top