|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 13:43:59 GMT -5
"There is physical tangible evidence that the world is older than 6000 years old, if it is not, how do you explain the layers upon layers of fossil evidence that clearly show that there have been millions of years where various forms of life have dominated the earth absent of man, if man was there why would they not be present in the same levels of the earth?"
"It is an arrogant man who say hes got it all figured out"
Romans 1:22
"Professing themselves to be wise they became fools."
The layers of rock and the fossils found in them could very well have been put there during the flood of noah.
Petrification of fossils has to happen rapidly not over millions of years.
The reason we dont see as many human fossils and the reason you dont see them with other fossils. is becuase man is smarter than the animal. He will do everything he can to keep from drwoning untill the last moment. therefore not being fossilized. and at the time of the flood there werent werent as many people as he have today.
How do you measure the age of rock? and the age of a fossil? the age of rock by the fossils found in it and the age of the fossil by the layer of it was found in . that is circular reasoning. and it certainly cant explain trees growing through multiple layers of rock for millions of years.
The bible is no myth. It is accurate history.
The reason you believe the womans arguement is becuase thats what you were looking for.
but we wont get into that i thought you didnt want to discuss religous belief but evolution.
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 2, 2004 16:38:46 GMT -5
Ryan the same science that governs the world that you and I live in now is the same science that can prove evolution and that the world is more than 6000 years old, not to insinuate that any of this applies to you but if your DNA is found in conjunction with a murder, whether or not you believe in this same science that proves the evolutionary theory is correct, it won’t matter, you are going to jail, whether or not you believe in the genetic science that proves evolution, also that the earth is hundreds of millions of years old and further disproves the creation myth, if they find that you have a genetic defect, you can be pretty sure they are going to be proven correct. Our entire world, medicine, the criminal court systems etc all function off of these scientific principles that you denounce without substantiation, I don’t have it all figured out but, I can use deductive reasoning and the factual evidence available to know what unsubstantiated premise to dismiss. When I was a small child I used to believe there was a Santa Claus there are tons of very old books that tell the tale of his existence and I got gifts from him every year for a long time, yet as an adult I know that every toy that the children in my life get each Christmas that says it came from Santa Claus I purchased myself and by default I know he does not exist. The worst lie ever told is the one you tell yourself.
Ryan I am trying to stay out of the bible other than as it applies to creationism. To the exact opposite I did not want to hear her say that, not that I had any intention of debating this subject with her, she just overheard the conversation I was having with a very staunch Mormon manager that worked for me, but if I had wanted to I would have wanted her to quote the bible, I would have wanted her to make claims of creationism because those items I can easily debunk with scientific fact, what makes creationism such an easy target is the wild Asop Fable stories that are told in the bible that are used to validate it. Did you know that in the Bhagavad-Gita there is virtually the exact same story as the story of Jesus Christ with the same players using almost the same names that took place in the same part of the world only a great deal earlier than the Christian faiths version? So why is it that this book which claims to be an accurate document of a time prior to 6000 years ago cannot be considered historical fact but the bible is? The woman I spoke of whose name was Norma took the one path that cannot be argued, true and personal faith without a need to substantiate it, no one can argue with what you believe in your heart if you offer no external evidence to attempt to substantiate it to them. If I tell you that I believe in an invisible clown that walks beside me everyday and advises me on how to run my life but I offer you no external evidence to try and prove to you that he exists how can prove he does not? There in lies the key to belief in a higher power, if you believe it without the need for proof you should be at peace with yourself and your beliefs, who are you really trying to convince when you expend a great deal of time and effort attempting to substantiate your position and why are you doing it? Do you really believe that these very unscientific claims you are making are going to sway anyone that believes to the contrary or is this all really just for your own self confirmation?
|
|
|
Post by Tony Carpenter on Dec 2, 2004 16:56:54 GMT -5
on the contrary Ryan most of the ways that fossil records have been determined is through writen work. When you find written work from a time period and find results from that time period at a similar depth you learn that it takes said time for artifacts to get that deep that gives a base for the results. As you get finds on different levels from time periods you can determine the time it takes for the sink affect to happen. When results are found below written works and civilization you stop finding human bodies and start finding other species and creatures. I'm sorry but when stuff's found hundreds of feet below sea level and humans are found only a hundred feet or so underground you gotto fess up.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Carpenter on Dec 2, 2004 17:00:17 GMT -5
and Christian, no offene taken. Sometimes I act a little to old for myself. BUT IT'S FUN DAMN IT!!!
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Dec 2, 2004 17:04:20 GMT -5
Simon: I love the clown analogy! Simon you might know, How many "religions " or "beliefs " are there that came before the Bible that had a great flood in it. I know of, but can't remember the African Tribe that dates back before the bible, that tells of a great flood. Love the statement " The bible is no myth ". " It is accurate history ". AHHHHHH
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 17:56:12 GMT -5
Well then do you question the existance of the flood if so many religions tribes and nations have recordings of it?
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 2, 2004 19:04:27 GMT -5
Christian there are many, as apocalyptic floods have been a staple in religions the world over, of course mind you most of these primitive societies version of the world was only as large as their bravest citizen had walked out and returned from alive, so to them a world ending flood really could have been one that killed almost all of them but affected little more. Lets see there is the great yellow river flood in China that is documented to have happened 4000 years ago, and the great Babylonian flood that was some 2500 years ago as I recall, I think I have a resource where they might list others, as an example though scientist show that the scope of either of these two floods was in fact smaller than floods that have happened in modern history, these BCE floods just seemed like they were world enders to the people that existed at the time. Please Ryan really, are we going to discuss this now, 2 of every creature on a boat? All that the fact that so many cultures speak of a great floods proves is that it is a common and fathomable manner for a primitive society to depict the end of the world. They could not exactly claim they were all going to die from nuclear war.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 23:15:22 GMT -5
The bible talks about a third of the earth being burned up. and gives some description of a nuclear war. The bible also prophecied that there will be two witnesses who are killed and the whole world sees it simultaneously. This still has not happened yet.At the time this was written there was no way it made sense untill the invention of tv and cnn. The bible prophecied the resurection of the roman empire and a common-wealth market. this has already begun to happen;) It also prophecied about a mark of the beast without wich you cannot buy or sell. itll work like a credit card. They are already distributing this product. I heard the name of the main computer running it is "The Beast" I dont know if this is true or not. The bible also prophecies of a "one world government" U.N, European Union. And a one world religion. The U.N. last year had a one world religion conference. "Trying to bring all religions under the same God" In the flood of noah according to the bible it was only he and a few of his family that survived. out of those people im sure they all taught their children of the flood and all went there own way with different religions and theologies after time. Do you honestly think that it is just a coincidence that all these different religions and cultures have the same story? I saw your lil theory about the boat not being enough and all that junk on the discovery channel and they left out alot of possibilties. They had a lil brain fart and said oh this must be truth becuase we are smarter than God.
|
|
|
Post by Harold "Rattlesnake" Ryden on Dec 3, 2004 6:49:33 GMT -5
I am not one to argue with evolution vs religion but one thing I find interesting in the book of Job is that there is some kind of monster or giant creature mentioned in there. They lived on earth as well as humans did and they were called a Leviathan. Another interesting thing is that God created Adam as a grown man....with age...whos saying he didnt create the world with age as well? He is God after all. We cant put him into a box and try to understand everything he does, we will drive ourselves mad. The more I try to understand everything the Lord has done and "created" the more I realize I am wasting my time, there are more inportant things like being a Godly man and a light for the Lord.
Ryan, Jesus said that when a city/town isnt listening, to leave that town brushing the dust off your feet, put it behind you man. It is good what you do here but arguing the same topic isnt really reaching anyone...just driving a few away.
Just be the light brother. Thats what God wants us to be. Just come on here...state your "facts" and move on. Not everyone will follow and not everyone will believe, unfortunatly, thats the way it is. Ive learned my lesson...believe me.
Your Brother,
Harold Ryden
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 3, 2004 11:36:22 GMT -5
Your very right.
And i try to just put it there and let people either like it or not and leave it at that but its hard for me to walk away. I know sometimes in some situations i should. Some people are listening you dont see it on the board but some people are listening im not here to preach those who arent listening.
Thank you Ryan
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 3, 2004 13:27:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 3, 2004 13:46:32 GMT -5
Ryan when things are written vaguely enough it is very easy to claim they are or have come true. I will make a prophecy that a new plague will befall mankind, it will cause great woe and suffering, also I will make a prophecy that an evil monster born of mans misdoings will torture and kill many humans, how long do you think it will take for me to point out what new news story could fit these prophecies?
I am not sure why you would indicate it was my little theory about the boat, the animals etc that’s too easy, again I would be a bit more concerned about the creationism portion of this story.
Harold least of all was I interested in offending you, I am sorry if I did. I personally think the greatest disservice someone can do to their belief in a higher power is to attempt to apply that entity against human understandings and realities, this has been a foible of man for millenniums. There is an entire school of thought that there is a god and he did create this planet and all of the creatures on it, but that the bible and everything like it is nothing more than a vain attempt by mankind to rationalize and humanize a power greater than we can understand. I again post this saying. "It is an arrogant man that claims to know for a fact the intent of a god"
I will tell you a favorite story of mine, I was asked some 7 years ago to be the godfather to my best friend’s son, we went through the Catholic ceremony and there is a portion where I now, as an adult along with the other adults involved was asked to recite the baptismal prayer I would have said if possible as an infant when I was baptized. I politely stood there as the others recited the prayer and the ceremony completed. Afterwards my best friends sister and mother approached me asking me why I did not say the prayer, I in turn asked them to whom was I supposed to be speaking to when I said that prayer? His mother replied sharply “well god of course”, to which I replied, “so would I really need to speak out loud in order to be heard by god?”
Of course the point is if any god is as all powerful as his followers believe him to be then he would not need our out loud confirmation of our belief as he would truly know what manner of person we really are in our heart, nor would he need our defense of his existence, much less any attempts by lowly humans to justify his existence with explanations of his actions in our very limited human terms of understanding.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 3, 2004 13:48:53 GMT -5
I have a theory of my own. Wich came to me a few months ago. All are welcome to address it.
If the earth is a planet that is at a perfect distance from the sun to support life. being that the slightest tilt would cause a frezing winter or a scorching summer. How is it if not created and placed by God that the astronomical possibilty that the gravitational force of the sun and the centifical force of the earth revolution around the sun are exactly balanced. if it were not we would have burned or frozen "millions of years ago".
That is my personal theory and i find it quit logical Im not a physics expert but that sounds pretty simple. And by that simple theory i see the glory of God in it.
Isaiah 6 1. In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2. Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: THE WHOLE EARTH IS FULL OF HIS GLORY.
I also just found an article that says this to back up my theory this is a man who knows a lil more about gravity and astronomics than me.
"1- Gravity. Gravity is the weakest force in the universe, yet it is in perfect balance. If gravity were any stronger, the smaller stars could not form, and if it were any smaller, the bigger stars could not form and no heavy elements could exist. Only "red dwarf" stars would exist, and these would radiate too feebly to support life on a planet.
All masses are found to attract one another with a force that varies inversely as the square of the separation distance between the masses. That, in brief, is the law of gravity. But where did that "2" [square] come from? Why is the equation exactly "separation distance squared"? Why is it not 1.87, 1.95, 2.001, or 3.378; why is it exactly 2? Every test reveals the force of gravity to be keyed precisely to that 2. Any value other than 2 would lead to an eventual decay of orbits, and the entire universe would destroy itself!"
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 3, 2004 13:57:46 GMT -5
I will respond to this link with a simple statement. Many people that know me have asked me what will I teach my children about religion, creationism, evolution etc, and the answer is all of it, granted both discussions will be a bit short with just the basics of each position only because the value of this is their path to self discovery, where by they make there own decision.
Ryan I have a great discussion for you on the placement of the earth, after I get some lunch I will be right back to you.
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Dec 3, 2004 14:28:56 GMT -5
what i meant about preaching in greek was that a greek origin cant be the original teaching of Christ who preached in hebrew.
|
|