The 6000 Year Earth

[rossum]

I really know almost nothing about science; plenty of opinion, not enough facts… I should probably move on to another thread that I know more about, that way I’m not just relying on others’ opinions.

“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all possible doubt.”

(by the way, rossum, how do you know the person who wrote that article wasn’t lying?)

The source gave a checkable reference and in the past that same source has proved reliable. I am reasonably sure that the author was correct.

Anyway, I think it’s more important to believe in the Creation, than the details of how He created.

An excellent thought. YECs can sometimes elevate small details to the status of salvation issues.

rossum

 

[rossum]

A man can believe what God says or he can believe what another man says. I choose to believe every word of the bible as taught to me though the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

The problem is that there are so many different versions of “what God says” out there. There are three different Abrahamic religions, all claiming to be the correct version of the religion of the God of Abraham. Each of those religions has many different sects, all of whom claim to be the correct version of that religion.

It is not a simple task to separate “whst God says” from “what men say”.

To say the Word of God is wrong is atheism.

Complete and utter rubbish! Are all Jews atheists because they say that the Word of God in the New Testament is wrong? Are all Protestants atheists wrong because they say that the Word of God in 1 Maccabees is wrong? Are all Catholics atheists because they say that the Word of God in Psalm 151 is wrong?

God told Adam that in the day he ate the forbidden fruit he would die.

And Adam did not die within 24 hours but lived for hundreds of years after he ate the fruit. Bit of a problem there for Biblical literalism there I would say. There are different interpretations of Genesis, literal and non-literal. You are wrong to call everyone who disagrees with your personal preferred interpretation “atheist”.

rossum

 

[Thing]

Anyone any good at physics problems an’ sums n’ stuff?

 

[look3467]

My view OK!

The seven day creation story is an illustrated view of God’s work in creation.
Object: To give us knowledge of God’s wonderful, masterful and loving Father.

This same seven day creation story is used again with Jesus as He comes into life in the middle of that seven day week, accomplishes the re-creative process and begins a new week of which there is no end.

Two Adams, two creation stories: 1. Adam brought death 2. Adam brought life, both real.

God doubles twice before He brings it to pass.

1. Adam = death
2. Adam = cancels death brings life
3. Adam = new creature, new creation to life eternal

So how old the earth is matters not, what matters is what God did for us.

Blessings, AJ

 

[heiscominginthe]

The problem is that there are so many different versions of “what God says” out there. There are three different Abrahamic religions, all claiming to be the correct version of the religion of the God of Abraham. Each of those religions has many different sects, all of whom claim to be the correct version of that religion.

It is not a simple task to separate “whst God says” from “what men say”.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Those who know him will hear his voice and it will come by way of that spirit of truth manifesting itself though the Word.

Complete and utter rubbish! Are all Jews atheists because they say that the Word of God in the New Testament is wrong? Are all Protestants atheists wrong because they say that the Word of God in 1 Maccabees is wrong? Are all Catholics atheists because they say that the Word of God in Psalm 151 is wrong?

A man can sup at the table of the Lord or that of his enemy. He cannot sup at both, he will love one and hate the other.

Quote:
God told Adam that in the day he ate the forbidden fruit he would die.

And Adam did not die within 24 hours but lived for hundreds of years after he ate the fruit. Bit of a problem there for Biblical literalism there I would say. There are different interpretations of Genesis, literal and non-literal. You are wrong to call everyone who disagrees with your personal preferred interpretation “atheist”.

Adam did indeed die in the day he ate the forbidden fruit, otherwise it could be said the Word of God contradicted itself.

In the day Adam ate the fruit, he died in his spirit and brought death to all mankind. It is for this reason a man must be reborn, born anew, born again in his spirit if he has hope of entering the kingdom of God.

So Adam may have lived 937 years in the flesh I believe, but his spirit was dead in him.

 

[heiscominginthe]

So how old the earth is matters not, what matters is what God did for us.

Do you not believe AJ that when a man believes a lie, he moves from the light, from God.

Do you believe when a man believes the Word of God without doubting he moves toward the light, toward God?

And look at the consequences of not believing one thing God told us, such as not to eat from the forbidden fruit or you will die. That one moment of doubt or disobedience brought death to all mankind.

 

[rossum]

Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Those who know him will hear his voice and it will come by way of that spirit of truth manifesting itself though the Word.

Those are the words of a man, not God. Other men say that the Messiah is yet to come. Other men say that Mohammed (pbuh) is the Prophet of God. Many men say different things. Why should I believe you rather than my local Rabbi or my local Imam?

A man can sup at the table of the Lord or that of his enemy. He cannot sup at both, he will love one and hate the other.

You have completely failed to answer my point. Are Jews atheists because they reject the New Testament? Either withdraw your ridiculous statement or defend it. Please do not avoid the question.

Adam did indeed die in the day he ate the forbidden fruit, otherwise it could be said the Word of God contradicted itself.

Adam did not die - he continued breathing and his heart continued beating. Dead people do not breathe and do not have a heartbeat. The problem is not with the word of God, the problem is with the overly literalistic interpretation that you put onto that word. I suggest that you find a better interpretation to use; one that does not require you to brand many who do not agree with you as “atheists”. Are you an atheist because you refuse to accept the Word of God as expressed in Psalm 151?

rossum

 

[look3467]

Do you not believe AJ that when a man believes a lie, he moves from the light, from God.

Do you believe when a man believes the Word of God without doubting he moves toward the light, toward God? (Absolutely)

And look at the consequences of not believing one thing God told us, such as not to eat from the forbidden fruit or you will die. That one moment of doubt or disobedience brought death to all mankind.

(Study my explanation below)

The lie in Eve’s case spoken by the Serpent was the truth, given in child like terms.

The reality of it is that knowledge gained is what separated us from God, as in the age of accountability, is when we become “gods”, for then we exercise god like qualities of free will.

Knowledge gain was a must, not a desire, if we were to have choice, otherwise, we would be like the animals.

The problem with knowledge gained was the desire for the things of the world which gratified the flesh to make us loose site of God.(It looked good, desirous to the eyes)

The lie was in act the truth!

Now, to Jesus’ time, He to was deceived in thinking that there would be a ransom, other than Himself, for He had offered up the Jews, as like Cain, the first fruits, while the Jews as Abel, had the better sacrifice, the lamb. (Jesus)

God accepted Abel’s sacrifice, while Cains was rejected.

So we can then say that, Jesus was a “marked” man, who had to suffer 7- fold for slaying Abel (Jews, figuratively speaking in the spiritual) and that the Jews found Him and slayed Him.

Pre-ordained, thus the Jews are forgiven, for they were only following the Lord’s commands.

Blessings, AJ

 

[heiscominginthe]

Originally Posted by heiscominginthe
Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Those who know him will hear his voice and it will come by way of that spirit of truth manifesting itself though the Word.

Those are the words of a man, not God. Other men say that the Messiah is yet to come. Other men say that Mohammed (pbuh) is the Prophet of God. Many men say different things. Why should I believe you rather than my local Rabbi or my local Imam?

Prove what I have written above is not in the Word of God. You cannot. I suggest that before you make a claim about something being the word of man and not the Word of God, you look it up first.

 

[heiscominginthe]

The lie in Eve’s case spoken by the Serpent was the truth, given in child like terms.

Deception, that which the devil used against Adam and Eve is a lie. He told Adam and Eve they would not die, but they did die in the day they ate the forbidden fruit. They died in their spirit and brought death to all mankind. It is for that reason God had to send his Son. For the spirit of a man is slain when he understands the law and realizes it is impossible for him not to sin. If that spirit in the man remains dead til the time he suffers physical death, his soul is taken to where the dead are reserved until the day of judgement. A man must be reborn, born again in his spirit if he wants to enter the kingdom of God.

 

[heiscominginthe]

Now, to Jesus’ time, He to was deceived in thinking that there would be a ransom, other than Himself, for He had offered up the Jews, as like Cain, the first fruits, while the Jews as Abel, had the better sacrifice, the lamb. (Jesus)

Are you saying Jesus was deceived?

 

[MarysGirls]

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all possible doubt."Hmm, perhaps I shouldn’t say anything to that…

The source gave a checkable reference and in the past that same source has proved reliable. I am reasonably sure that the author was correct. Fair enough.

An excellent thought. YECs can sometimes elevate small details to the status of salvation issues. Hey, at least we agree on some things.

rossum

See you on a different thread. Happy debating everybody.

 

[Orogeny]

What does the Word of God say? All things died. The whales would have died because of the violent, turbulent upheavel of landmass or be found a fish out of water once the waters receded.

Common sense and the Word of God.

So whales were aboard the ark?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

And if the oceans floors were above water and the existing land below, you would say that very same thing.

I suggest you study to see if these mountains in our oceans are further from earth’s core then Everest. Then maybe you will believe.

I suggest you explain how, if the seamounts are farther from the center of the earth than the Himalayas as you seem to believe, what keeps the water there.

Are the tops of the seamounts above or below sea level?

Are the tops of the Himalayas above or below sea level?

What is preventing water from remaining above the tops of the Himalaya?

Peace

Tim

 

[Thing]

So whales were aboard the ark?

Peace

Tim

and of every thing that creepeth on the earth according to its kind; two of every sort shall go in with thee, that they may live.

I think the ark was for birds and land animals only…

 

[Thing]

Anyone any good at physics problems an’ sums n’ stuff?

Sure Thing, ask away!

 

[rossum]

and of every thing that creepeth on the earth according to its kind; two of every sort shall go in with thee, that they may live.

I think the ark was for birds and land animals only…

But Ambulocetus was a land animal, so it was also aboard the Ark. However, once it left the Ark the new population of Ambuloceti evolved very quickly into modern whales. To quote Creation Ministries International:Informed creationists have long pointed out that the biblical model of earth history would not only allow for the possibility of one species splitting into several (without the addition of new information, thus not ‘evolution’ as commonly understood), but would actually require that it must have happened much faster than evolutionists would expect. The thousands of vertebrate species on the Ark emerged into a world with large numbers of empty ecological niches, often as varied as the two worlds of our mosquito example here. They must have split many times into new species in the first few centuries thereafter, as the bear population, for example, gave rise to polar bears, grizzlies, giant pandas and more.

Source: Creation Ministries International, Brisk Biters.

rossum

 

[rossum]

heiscominginthe;5098383:

Jesus Christ is the Word of God. Those who know him will hear his voice and it will come by way of that spirit of truth manifesting itself though the Word.

Those are the words of a man, not God. Other men say that the Messiah is yet to come. Other men say that Mohammed (pbuh) is the Prophet of God. Many men say different things. Why should I believe you rather than my local Rabbi or my local Imam?

Prove what I have written above is not in the Word of God.

You say “Jesus Christ is the Word of God”. I take this to be synonymous with “Jesus Christ is the Messiah”.

We read: “And he shall set up a banner for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” (Isaiah 11:12). Jesus did not do this - there have been Jews outside Israel since before Jesus was born.

Also “…they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.” (Micah 4:3). Jesus did not do this, and there has not been an era of peace since He was born. We are still learning war; West Point and Sandhurst are both still teaching war.

Hence Jesus was not the promised Messiah, because He did not do all the things that the Messiah was meant to do - He only did some of them. At best He was a partial Messiah, not a full Messiah. Hence He was not the Word of God, at most He was the partial Word of God.

You cannot.

Yes I can. I just did so.

I suggest that before you make a claim about something being the word of man and not the Word of God, you look it up first.

But where do I look it up? In the Tanakh? In the Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox version of the Bible? In the Book of Mormon? In the Qur’an? In the Bhagavad Gita? There are many books that claim to be the “Word of God”. How can I tell which is the right one and which are the wrong ones?

You are continuing to avoid my point about your accusing all Jews of being atheists because they do not accept the New Testament. I call on you in all honesty to withdraw your false assertion:

To say the Word of God is wrong is atheism.

Jews say that the New Testament is wrong. They are not atheists because of that. You are wrong and you should withdraw those remarks.

rossum

 

[Thing]

But Ambulocetus was a land animal, so it was also aboard the Ark. However, once it left the Ark the new population of Ambuloceti evolved very quickly into modern whales. To quote Creation Ministries International:Informed creationists have long pointed out that the biblical model of earth history would not only allow for the possibility of one species splitting into several (without the addition of new information, thus not ‘evolution’ as commonly understood), but would actually require that it must have happened much faster than evolutionists would expect. The thousands of vertebrate species on the Ark emerged into a world with large numbers of empty ecological niches, often as varied as the two worlds of our mosquito example here. They must have split many times into new species in the first few centuries thereafter, as the bear population, for example, gave rise to polar bears, grizzlies, giant pandas and more.

Source: Creation Ministries International, Brisk Biters.

rossum

shaw: Evolution has to happen quickly or the beasties would die out before they evolved.

 

[StAnastasia]

Buffalo [above]The question being; is there really enough water on planet earth to cover the highest mountains.

That water could never cover Everest, because it is tied up in the mantle. Moreover, it’s a bit odd that a biblical literalist should go to great “scientific” lengths to invent sources of water that are not mentioned in the Bible!