L
L.Kraiger
Guest
LOL RELALLY???
I FOUND IT!!! :
LoL ARE GOD is such an AWESUm GOD!!! LOLZ
- Status
I FOUND IT!!! :
N
namguy69
Guest
Physical evidence is not bibical truth. Science ‘speculates and theorizes,’ Exactly just how old the earth is; from my readings of KJV Bible I agree that the earth is 5,000 - 6,000 years old, no more.
N
namguy69
Guest
Suggesting is not proof.
N
namguy69
Guest
My question is how is it Catholics only make it half way to Heaven, limbo, that seems to be their goal and most of them feel lucky if they make it that far! To me this mode of thought is…well, a might of center one might say
G
Giovanni
Guest
14Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
16And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. 17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.
So how can anyone explain the above.
I get tired of the same arguments, people argue for the sake of arguing, look at the big picture and know that God is the Creator of all that is, and who cares about holw long the earth has been around, how does that get you to Heaven.
15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
16And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. 17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.
So how can anyone explain the above.
I get tired of the same arguments, people argue for the sake of arguing, look at the big picture and know that God is the Creator of all that is, and who cares about holw long the earth has been around, how does that get you to Heaven.
N
namguy69
Guest
Well, that’s up to them:thumbsup:
E
Evan
Guest
What a strange thing to write! You may want to look into limbo because it has nothing to do withMy question is how is it Catholics only make it half way to Heaven, limbo, that seems to be their goal and most of them feel lucky if they make it that far! To me this mode of thought is…well, a might of center one might say
- This discussion
- The final end of any Catholic
S
Syele
Guest
I see the whole thing this way:
- The Bible is inspired by God.
- God is never Wrong.
- Science is a very useful tool for knowing about the world around us.
- When Science and God agree there is no issue.
- When Science and God Disagree, I have to agree with God.
E
Evan
Guest
Very Nice. But the arguments in the world come from 3 and 5.
Science tries to investigate the truth. God is Truth. So science, when it has reached accurate results always falls in category 4.
Many times science claims 3 (it knows something when it does not. (see Newtonian science or Copernican astronomy and what we know of the orbit of Mercury)
Many times Christians claim 5 when God has not made such a claim. For example: Solomon (I believe) was asked to construct a table with circumfrence =3 and diameter =1 so pi=3. This is wrong…was God wrong: No God had to use measurements that could be measured at the time. We have now shown that pi cannot be written down. It is a transendental number. There is not even a simple way to describe it (like sqrt of 2 is the solution to x squared = 2).
pi=3 is an approximation, so is pi=3.1 and pi=3.14159 etc.
God is never wrong, but we are people, we can be wrong. We can be wrong in how we interpret God’s Word. Or how we apply God’s Word. Trust in scripture, but remember some of scripture is poetry, some is history, some is parable, some is using a story to explain a greater truth that cannot be expressed in words. One difficulty is discerning which type of verse you are reading.
And to make things worse…
God writes on many levels: Literal, spiritual, as analogy. etc. Sometimes within the same book and with the same words ( eg a maiden bearing a child is a sign to an OT King, a virgin bearing a child is a sign to all humanity. Both true but true in different ways to different people at different times)
S
Syele
Guest
Right, People can be wrong. While people may occasionally misinterpret God’s word, Science is *entirely *generated by people and is not inspired at all. The weight still falls towards God being right and science being wrong when they disagree. The pi example is a matter of degree (correct when using the measuring rod of the time and correct using other explainations as well) whereas evolution vs. Creation is not a tiny degree off but a huge gaping difference.
E
Evan
Guest
When they disagree one or the other is wrong: either science or our interpretation of God’s revelation. If both are correct, they agree.
Another example of a growth in understanding revelation: A messiah would come and save Israel.
There was a time when the interpretation was applied to Cyrus, King of Persia. He was called the messiah because he did just that. He came and restored the Hebrew people to Jerusalem and the surrounding districts. He helped them rebuild the Temple and re-initiate worship of God in the Temple.
With the coming of Jesus our understanding of Israel, Save, and Messiah grew:
Israel is the Body of Christ: all people are invited to be part of the Body of Chirst hence the name Catholic (Universal) is now applied to Israel (Paul uses the Term Israel to identify the Church and Jews to identify the decendents of Abraham in Romans There is much overlap)
Save is not a physical salvation such as Moses and David and Cyrus offered, but and eternal salvation through the blood of the cross.
Messiah is not an savior who will come and go but one who will be with us always, even to the end of days.
Another example of a growth in understanding revelation: A messiah would come and save Israel.
There was a time when the interpretation was applied to Cyrus, King of Persia. He was called the messiah because he did just that. He came and restored the Hebrew people to Jerusalem and the surrounding districts. He helped them rebuild the Temple and re-initiate worship of God in the Temple.
With the coming of Jesus our understanding of Israel, Save, and Messiah grew:
Israel is the Body of Christ: all people are invited to be part of the Body of Chirst hence the name Catholic (Universal) is now applied to Israel (Paul uses the Term Israel to identify the Church and Jews to identify the decendents of Abraham in Romans There is much overlap)
Save is not a physical salvation such as Moses and David and Cyrus offered, but and eternal salvation through the blood of the cross.
Messiah is not an savior who will come and go but one who will be with us always, even to the end of days.
E
Evan
Guest
Evolution has a great many problems:
Some imply that it explains the origin of life. Science has set that question aside as they have no theory at this time.
Micro evolution is explained as the differentiation with in a species rather than the development of new species
Macro evolution is an off the wall explanation the seem to have physical evidence but no theory can explain how it comes about.
Evolution seems to be more in the realm of Scientism (a religious belief in Science) than in in the realm of Science.
But the explanation offered by Young Earth enthusiasts seem to imply the God is a liar. If He put the evidence of many ages in the earth’s strata and the earth is young, He lied by implication. And God revealed himself to be Truth.
Wait a hundred years. Maybe we will understand more.
Some imply that it explains the origin of life. Science has set that question aside as they have no theory at this time.
Micro evolution is explained as the differentiation with in a species rather than the development of new species
Macro evolution is an off the wall explanation the seem to have physical evidence but no theory can explain how it comes about.
Evolution seems to be more in the realm of Scientism (a religious belief in Science) than in in the realm of Science.
But the explanation offered by Young Earth enthusiasts seem to imply the God is a liar. If He put the evidence of many ages in the earth’s strata and the earth is young, He lied by implication. And God revealed himself to be Truth.
Wait a hundred years. Maybe we will understand more.
N
namguy69
Guest
I agree with you 100%+
G
Giovanni
Guest
Love it, how true.
Still, has anyone have an answer to, when Caine went to live in Nod, east of Eden, found a wife, had a son, built a city and named it after his son.
Where did everyone come from
.
R
rbarcia
Guest
Many ask this question thinking they’ve found a “mistake” in the Bible—that there must have been other people besides Adam and Eve. Scripture tells us that Adam is “the first man” (1 Corinthians 15:45); that there were no other humans when he was created, because God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone” (Genesis 2:18); and that Eve is “the mother of all living” (Genesis 3:20). Cain, then, must have married distant sisters. All of the first-generation siblings married each other in order to populate the earth. At that time there was no law against incest. But as the population grew large enough, and as the risk of genetic problems increased because of sin’s curse, God outlawed marriage between siblings.Love it, how true.
Still, has anyone have an answer to, when Caine went to live in Nod, east of Eden, found a wife, had a son, built a city and named it after his son.
Where did everyone come from
The Bible does not record all the children people have, usually the oldest. (Unless it is significant like with Noah, or Jacob)
**
Gen 5
1 This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created. 3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. 4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
6 Seth lived one hundred and five years, and begot Enosh. 7 After he begot Enosh, Seth lived eight hundred and seven years, and had sons and daughters. 8 So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.
**
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
(I FINALLY found the time to get back to this, I was very busy these last 2 weeks.)
This goes back to the example I gave above, if I have a quater made in 1950AD and I put in in a pile of quarters made in 2000AD I CANNOT conclude the pile of quarters is at least 50 years old due to the FOREIGN 1950AD quarter.
If a meteorite is 4B years old and I put in on the earth that is of an UNKNOWN age I CANNOT conclude the earth is 4B years old.
(on top of that the 4B figure becomes even more questionable due to the fact its a foreign sample)
First the point is you are dealing with FOREIGN samples. Foreign means there is uncertainty about it, especially its origins and as a result you cant point to it as solid evidence because you have nothing DOMESTIC to compare it to.
Second if I or anyone else were to show they were NOT meteorites then YOU have FAR more explaining to do, in otherwords if it were shown they were NOT meteorites then that proves your caculations/methods are seriously flawed.
Each and every variable has not been discussed, debated and LEAST of all “ACCEPTED”. Thats where sly comments in texts like “most scientists believe ___” come in handy, it gives the appearance of truth without having to really explain.
As for the “millions of Christian scientists”, that doesnt mean squat for multiple reasons, most especially because anyone can call themself “Christian” and believe almost ANYTHING in todays world, for example they might reject the teaching that Adam and Eve were the first parents…whats WORSE is that there are “Christian scientists” who FLATLY disagree with the billion year old earth stuff indicating there isnt agreement.
You merely brushed off my claims. Your accusing ME of “bad data” while I gave a direct quote from your link saying none of the ORIGINAL earths rocks exist that havnt undergone some drastic transformation. This tranformation prevents accurate data because there are no undisturbed samples to measure. In otherwords the “age” calculated is far from fact, it is rather conjecture and needs to be admitted as such.
This is exactly the problem Im talking about. The “lower limit” is founded on UNORIGINAL samples and worse yet FOREIGN samples from meteorites, as a result this “lower limit” is calculated on other preconceived ideas and as a result not proven fact but rather speculation/theory. Think about what your saying, your measuring the EARTHS age based on NON-EARTH samples.
This goes back to the example I gave above, if I have a quater made in 1950AD and I put in in a pile of quarters made in 2000AD I CANNOT conclude the pile of quarters is at least 50 years old due to the FOREIGN 1950AD quarter.
If a meteorite is 4B years old and I put in on the earth that is of an UNKNOWN age I CANNOT conclude the earth is 4B years old.
(on top of that the 4B figure becomes even more questionable due to the fact its a foreign sample)
Two problems here.
First the point is you are dealing with FOREIGN samples. Foreign means there is uncertainty about it, especially its origins and as a result you cant point to it as solid evidence because you have nothing DOMESTIC to compare it to.
Second if I or anyone else were to show they were NOT meteorites then YOU have FAR more explaining to do, in otherwords if it were shown they were NOT meteorites then that proves your caculations/methods are seriously flawed.
I dont see whats so funny, sofar I have shown that the article you provided is founded on presumptions and other unfounded results…all the while passed of as genuine science because the “experts” said so.
FALSE. This article and my comments have SHOWN that such science DOES “WORK that way”. Why?..because true science has been blurred in favor of grasping for anything that will show the results they want, and surrounding themselves with the “scientists” who agree with them, and more importantly what will be able to be published in childrens (secular) textbooks (to point away from God).
Each and every variable has not been discussed, debated and LEAST of all “ACCEPTED”. Thats where sly comments in texts like “most scientists believe ___” come in handy, it gives the appearance of truth without having to really explain.
As for the “millions of Christian scientists”, that doesnt mean squat for multiple reasons, most especially because anyone can call themself “Christian” and believe almost ANYTHING in todays world, for example they might reject the teaching that Adam and Eve were the first parents…whats WORSE is that there are “Christian scientists” who FLATLY disagree with the billion year old earth stuff indicating there isnt agreement.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
Again your missing the point. Here is the quote from that article again:The samples thought to be the oldest are highly pulverized and difficult to date, though there are a few dates extending all the way to 4.4 to 4.5 billion years.Your “RANGE” is totally BOGUS. It is saying the oldest samples are damaged and “difficult to date” indicating you cant rely on such data for your calculations. As I said before: At the very least this shows there is no uniform data but rather a picking of the samples that produce that data that fits their preselected ages.
You have simply proved my point, your definition of “wacky ideas” scientist includes anyone who disagrees with your results. The results of such “fact finding” are nothing more than going along with what the “experts” want us to believe which results in what I have already termed “junk science”.
And this junk science influences many aspects of our lives today, for example the “experts” and “scientists” not seeing the unborn as humans but rather a lump of mass that can be “aborted”.
This is a jumble of fluff capped off by an absurd remark. Saying the sun is “hot” is an oversimplification in this discussion. How “hot”? How long has it been “hot”? What is producing this “heat”?, etc.
Its questions like these which science can attempt to asnwer but until there is sufficient proof these “answers” must be careful to remain in the realm of theory and not fact.
Its a prediction when you dont know for sure what the age is. In regards to the tree ring counting stuff in that article the methods and calculations was far more plausible than the billion year and meteorite stuff.
This is more oversimplification on your part. Just because I believe something is verifyable 2000 years ago DOES NOT mean I give the same credence to ANY YEAR, especiall something claiming to be thousands or billions of years old. You should do the same.Wow, an actual age is used and you don’t dispute it? Why not? Were you there when it happened?
There are historical records of that eruption and there is science that can show those records to be accurate. True science stays within the windows of verifyable data such as the eruption, to go outside that window of verifyable data means you have crossed into the realm of theory/speculation. In general is NOTHING wrong with theory/speculation but it shouldnt be passed off as undisputed fact, especially in the textbooks.
Your missing the point. There is a discrepency here which is ignored. To claim something is verified at 2000 or even hundreds of thousands of years DOES NOT give the right to say it is accurate at billions of years. Infact real science shows we must be careful on such magnitudes, for example Planks Constant, Max Planck found that the modern day equations the experts had or were producing for physics didnt work after a certain magnitude (the atomic level), he noticed the equations giving one solution while the data gave another.
This doesnt exuse the absurd “it only differs in degree” oversimplification he provided. As for the “Christian” title thats relative given the various positions of Protestantism, for someone who is so smart why isnt he Catholic?
When it mentions easily veryfiable results I said his position has merit, in this case the experiment holds for 60 years, thats a far cry from extending this out to magnitudes in the billions of year AGO.
IN SHORT the credibility only extends as far as verifyable samples extend and its as simple as that. They have no business at all projecting results on several orders of magnitude larger than their verifiable results.
L
lak611
Guest
The authors of the Bible were NOT ignorant. They were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it. The Holy Spirit is God, the Third Person of the Trinity, Who is all-knowing. What is in the Bible is inerrant.
L
lak611
Guest
:bowdown2: :clapping:
S
Syele
Guest
Well slightly off topic, I think, but here’s an explaination and a chart showing population growth at that time period. (the answer was geared for children to understand.) Cains wife was either his sister (if he married very young) or a neice if he waited till he was older to marry. (The Bible dosn’t say how old he was when he got married I don’t think.) The population of the Earth could easily have been quite large by the time Cain got married.Love it, how true.
Still, has anyone have an answer to, when Caine went to live in Nod, east of Eden, found a wife, had a son, built a city and named it after his son.
Where did everyone come from
- Status