The 6000 Year Earth

[Orogeny]

Exactly where did I claim that? I said there are sciences that are not true sciences and there are scientists that attempt to use science to justify their disbelief in God. Namely, evolutionists. If you do a search on all the scientists who are involved in evolution, I speculate the majority are atheists.

Well, in discussing who to believe, scientists of you, you wrote “Don’t fear him who can kill the body, but fear him who can kill the body and toss the soul into hell.”. Sounds to me that you are equating scientists who accept evolution and an old earth with “him who can kill the body and toss the soul into hell.” Do you want to retract that?

And the entire argument comes down to your personal interpretation of scriptures versus science. There are those on these forums that insist that the entire universe orbits the earth because that is what scripture teaches. Are you one of them?

Peace

Tim

 

[matahari]

Agreed. Overanalyzing Rev. is an all-to-common problem among Protestants and increasing Catholics. I see this as a “rub-off” of increasing alliances between them.

---

Hello Feanor , When I was a lot younger I was working my way through my Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible and I commented to a fellow Catholic that I was having some difficulty understanding the Book of Revelations to which his erudite reply was something like this " Oh you’re not supposed to try to read this . It might make you proud !"
Its OK for Catholics to read the Bible now and even discuss with other Christians.

So on the basis that God speaks through His Word how do you understand the meaning of Rev. 21: 23-25
thanks,
Tonette

 

[matahari]

And the entire argument comes down to your personal interpretation of scriptures versus science. There are those on these forums that insist that the entire universe orbits the earth because that is what scripture teaches. Are you one of them?

Peace

Tim

---

To you the earth may be an insignificant planet revolving round an insignificant star

but to the Creator of the Universe it is of Singular importance

 

[BareKnuckler]

Um, I have always seen the fossils as supposedly millions and maybe even billions years old by paleontologists?

I believe the Earth is older then 6000 years, at least.

 

[Orogeny]

---

To you the earth may be an insignificant planet revolving round an insignificant star

but to the Creator of the Universe it is of Singular importance

To you an image on a piece of toast really is the Blessed Virgin Mary but to the Creator of the Universe it is a piece of toast.

Now, I realize I have no basis for that statement, but since we are throwing out random statements, it seems like that fits.

Peace

Tim

 

[avflf]

You wish I were an athiest? Wow. I wouldn’t wish that on you.

Peace

Tim

Tim, is there anywhere in the Forum where you’ve actually defined your beliefs, i.e. your concept of God, your views on the Bible, your acceptance or otherwise of the life after death teachings of the church and could you direct me to it? If not, would you be amenable to give me a brief description of your thoughts on these subjects? I’d very much appreciate it. Thanks.

 

[Bradleyc]

If he had done so then he would have a Nobel prize, just as Einstein got one for showing that Newton was wrong.

or maybe like Al Gore? lol

 

[rossum]

Tim, is there anywhere in the Forum where you’ve actually defined your beliefs

Look at the top right of any of his posts, where it says “Religion: Catholic”.

rossum

 

[Bradleyc]

You wish I were an athiest? Wow. I wouldn’t wish that on you.

Peace

Tim

Tim, i was referring to your comment about this:

Re: The 6000 Year Earth

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by StAnastasia
Tim, here’s a dentist, ignorant of biology, who rejects knowledge, and was duly rejected even by Texas!:

“The Texas state Senate on Thursday rejected the governor’s nomination of Republican Don McLeroy to be chairman of the State Board of Education, according to yesterday’s Dallas Morning News. McLeroy is currently serving as chairman under an interim appointment. A two-thirds majority was required to approve the nomination, and the vote was one short–19-11 to confirm. McLeroy-- who believes in creationism and who does not believe global warming is taking place-- has been criticized for trying to promote his religious views on curricular issues. McLeroy denies that he has pressed his views in the consideration of education policy. McLeroy supporter Sen. Steve Ogden accused Democrats of applying a religious test in rejecting the nomination. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]”

religionclause.blogspot.com/

Unfortunately, I am all too familiar with that guy. I, for one, am happy that he has been removed from his chairmanship.

i did not say that i wished you were an atheist, my comment meant that i think that you would rather have an atheist instead of McLeroy…

 

[avflf]

Look at the top right of any of his posts, where it says “Religion: Catholic”.

rossum

Thanks for pointing it out but I’m sure Tim can answer for himself. There are many different view points on these subjects among Catholics and I was hoping to read his.

 

[Bradleyc]

Then you can relax. Neither evolution nor geology are false sciences, so you don’t have to worry about the hearts of men.

You didn’t answer my question about why so many scientists try to disprove God. Is it perhaps at least in part because of people like you who dismiss everything about science that isn’t explicitly spoken of in scriptures? People like you who, while having little or no science backgrounds love to publicly announce that evolution, geology, cosmology, etc… are false sciences that are nothing more than an athiest conspiracy to steal our souls? People like you who insist that we leave all logic at the church door?

Peace

Tim

Logic is good, but it sounds like your evolutionists have a lot more “faith” in your scientists (blind faith and lacking logic)
for 40 years your peers have believed in the “Piltdown man”, then there was the “mars rock”, and now, possibly “IDA”. where was the scientific approach or “logic” in those scenerios?

 

[heiscominginthe]

You wish I were an athiest? Wow. I wouldn’t wish that on you.

Peace

Tim

I thank God for you Tim and am glad you are not an atheist.

 

[heiscominginthe]

Logic is good, but it sounds like your evolutionists have a lot more “faith” in your scientists (blind faith and lacking logic)
for 40 years your peers have believed in the “Piltdown man”, then there was the “mars rock”, and now, possibly “IDA”. where was the scientific approach or “logic” in those scenerios?

Can logic also be called common sense? Yet, are we to see God using logic or faith?

Heb. 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

[heiscominginthe]

Um, I have always seen the fossils as supposedly millions and maybe even billions years old by paleontologists?

I believe the Earth is older then 6000 years, at least.

There is a logical reason why scientists when using carbon dating preflood materials believe or get results that say the material is millions or billions of years old. The answer can be found in the original thread.

Science tries to use a test established in today’s periodical table which is chemically different from preflood material. Everything on the face of the earth is chemically different from materials that are preflood. Our world today is saturated, bombarded by appoximately 13 times more radiation than that of preflood earth.

So when preflood materials are tested using tests established by today’s chemical principles, it is logical that there will be a huge difference in dating the material since the chemical properties are not the same. Now, what if it were possilble to remove the radiation in materials. Doesn’t it make sense that then they could acheive a much more accurate test on determining the age of preflood material?

 

[StAnastasia]

Logic is good, but it sounds like your evolutionists have a lot more “faith” in your scientists (blind faith and lacking logic)
for 40 years your peers have believed in the “Piltdown man”, then there was the “mars rock”, and now, possibly “IDA”. where was the scientific approach or “logic” in those scenerios?

It was science that exposed Piltdown man. It was science that concluded against the mars rock. It is scientists who are discussing the significance of the Ida fossil. Your point about science is what?

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Science tries to use a test established in today’s periodical table which is chemically different from preflood material. Everything on the face of the earth is chemically different from materials that are preflood. Our world today is saturated, bombarded by appoximately 13 times more radiation than that of preflood earth.

Have you run this by any scientists? They could tell you whether you are on to something about this flood theory of yours.

 

[Orogeny]

Tim, is there anywhere in the Forum where you’ve actually defined your beliefs, i.e. your concept of God, your views on the Bible, your acceptance or otherwise of the life after death teachings of the church and could you direct me to it?

Yeah, there are several. I have been on these forums (fora, if you prefer) for quite a while and have frequently had to define my beliefs for people who didn’t consider me a Christian.

If not, would you be amenable to give me a brief description of your thoughts on these subjects? I’d very much appreciate it. Thanks.

Well, let me re-state them rather than searching through my past posts.

I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.

I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through Him all things were made.

For me and for my salvation, He came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For my sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day, He rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son He is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

I would like to take credit for that, but I didn’t write it. However, I deeply and fully believe every single thing in that creed. I am a Catholic who loves the Church and does his best to follow her teachings.

I love the bible. I read it every single day as part of my time with the Lord.

I find it interesting that I think that most people who wonder about my faith do so because of my positions regarding science. I think that science is a wonderful gift from God that allows us to discover the wonders of His creation. I sincerely believe that He wants us to use the intelligence that He gave us to understand His creation because that is a wonderful way to learn more about Him.

I don’t know if that answers your questions, but it will have to do for now.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

i did not say that i wished you were an atheist, my comment meant that i think that you would rather have an atheist instead of McLeroy…

I apologize for the misunderstanding, but where did you get the idea that I wanted an atheist in that position?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

I thank God for you Tim and am glad you are not an atheist.

Thank you.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Logic is good, but it sounds like your evolutionists have a lot more “faith” in your scientists (blind faith and lacking logic)
for 40 years your peers have believed in the “Piltdown man”, then there was the “mars rock”, and now, possibly “IDA”. where was the scientific approach or “logic” in those scenerios?

Do you know ANYTHING about Piltdown man? Who discovered the fraud? Hmm?

Ida is an interesting fossil and I will wait until the scientific community has a chance to review the report and study the fossil before I weigh in on it, but unless you have evidence that it is a fake, I’m interested in why you lumped it in with Piltdown man.

Peace

Tim