getting dates about a young earth

[eternally-gratefull]

Your defensive posture implicates your position as a weak one...yes?

Weak? Says who? Who is being defensive? I am calling you out on your problems. You are the one coming out swinging, does that nt prove your position is so weak you feel you have to fight for it (like a bully)

see here, You could not even respond to what I said, all you could do was attack.. So again, WHo is the weak one? If you were not so weak you would just answer the post. That would stop you from having to be proud and attack

 

[Colt45Bullet]

Who cares when we got here. I think it is stupid how YEC and OEC argue about how old the earth is, while people are still dying and going to hell. We are here now, and the end is coming. Go save people for crying out loud!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Following that logic...then God created the laws of physics with an inherent bent towards age-deception...

does not peter say something like this?

That is the last days there will be SCOFFERS. WHo assume the world has been exactly the same since the begining of creation..

Aint it just funny how YEC's science use this very flawed thesis as the basis of their science..

 

[Bowman]

Weak? Says who? Who is being defensive?

Your posts are reactive.

 

[Bowman]

Who cares when we got here. I think it is stupid how YEC and OEC argue about how old the earth is, while people are still dying and going to hell. We are here now, and the end is coming. Go save people for crying out loud!

It matters for the simple reason of perception.

 

[Dan_473]

The Hebrew indicates vast passages of time required in their upbringing, of which, would not be required if they were each fully formed and educated.

details about the hebrew, plzzzz? I'm interested.

so, two questions
were adam and eve formed as babies?
were they born to non-human parents?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Your posts are reactive.

That could be said of yours. Why do you not stop looking outsider so much and start looking in..

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Who cares when we got here. I think it is stupid how YEC and OEC argue about how old the earth is, while people are still dying and going to hell. We are here now, and the end is coming. Go save people for crying out loud!

Some people just have to be right no matter what.. And they do not care who they tear down to make sure they are right..

 

[Dino246]

You are the only one to use the word 'insult'. Interesting that you would feel the need...

Your favorite term...'dodge'....like the cars that you seem to idolize...

Do you have a better term for using the word "simpleton" which you applied to fellow Christians? That sounds like an insult to me. So yes, I felt the need, and that is my reason.

Dodge, as in sidestep or avoid. Once again, you fail to deal directly with my challenge and make a personal attack. Ad hominem arguments do not validate your views. You still haven't defended your assertion of the unchanging speed of light.

 

[justin777]

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...arth-millions-years-old-but-humans-arent.html

 

[eternally-gratefull]

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...arth-millions-years-old-but-humans-arent.html

I read it I saw no proof. Only a persons view of what certain scripture meant..

 

[Dan_473]

Changing liquid from one form to another is hardly deception.

if Jesus makes real wine out of water, to me that would be a good parallel with making an already-aged universe.

presenting someone with a liquid that can be observed to be wine, but is in fact wine-tasting liquid, I would say is a kind of deception.

 

[Dan_473]

That's the importance of Einstein's Relativity.

Its called 'relativity' because its relative to any vantage point in the Universe.

suppose the vantage points moved as well?

to put it another way, shall we say that it's impossible for God to have changed the speed of light, but changed other things as well, such that we observe the speed of light to be unchanging?

 

[Dan_473]

Appearances are not guaranteed to be valid means of assessing age (check with the Gibeonites on this).

I wanted to learn more about this. what passage is it?

 

[Dan_473]

It is if they want to used the term 'supposed' in relation to the most proven principles in all of physics.

I did a word search and couldn't find the word 'supposed'... what post are you referring to?

 

[Dan_473]

Following that logic...then God created the laws of physics with an inherent bent towards age-deception...

yes, exactly!
the thinking would be, then, that no one need be deceived if they are willing to access the revelation in the scriptures.

 

[Dan_473]

Who cares when we got here. I think it is stupid how YEC and OEC argue about how old the earth is, while people are still dying and going to hell. We are here now, and the end is coming. Go save people for crying out loud!

good point... at the same time, there are implications for how we go about interpreting scripture.

 

[Dino246]

I wanted to learn more about this. what passage is it?

Joshua 9. Sorry, I could have included that.

 

[kodiak]

so, does that fit in with the "science is unreliable for dating the earth" position or the "science correctly observes the earth to be old, because God created it to appear old" position?

or is it in a third group, that scientific methods can correctly show that the earth is young?

It fits in a fourth....If you go into a lot of detail it proves a young earth, but on the surface it disproves the unreliability of dating methods.

 

[Dino246]

Who cares when we got here. I think it is stupid how YEC and OEC argue about how old the earth is, while people are still dying and going to hell. We are here now, and the end is coming. Go save people for crying out loud!

I get your point, but then I question on what basis shall we 'save' them, and from what (recognizing of course that God does the 'saving'). The reason I don't accept assertions of an old earth is that, as I noted in an earlier post, Scripture itself states clearly that the heavens and the earth were created in six days, and by clear context, it means six literal days (from sundown to sundown). If we reject this, we reject the plain teaching of Genesis (which is the foundation for every other doctrine in Scripture) and we reject the reliability and truthfulness of Scripture. If Scripture is not the truth, we have no reason to save people. While this is a simple summary of the logic, there is a bit of a domino effect which is of concern.

Is there room for differing interpretations? In some things, yes, and this may be one of them. I have friends and family with whom I differ on the age of creation, but because I know their character, I don't doubt their salvation or high view of Scripture. However, if one of them makes an assertion which is not apparent or is logically flawed, I will likely question it.