How old is our creation really?

[bojack]

I see. You were replying to the paradigm of her and not me when you said “mean ole creationist”.

She was not attacking them. She mentioned , since it’s a interview about her and her work and her life experiences between science and faith, the issues from atheists and creationists. One issue she does not like is when unqualified people misrepresents her work or when she’s falsely accused of being evil.

I definitely understand that. As a Christian who strongly believes in God and his word I’m often treated as less qualified by atheists and as someone who sees the clear evidence of science pointing towards evolution I am also accused by Christians for not having faith in God or the Bible. Which is ridiculous. I constantly bring up my faith. I’m not ashamed of it or Christ. I’m not ashamed that I believe in God and that includes that his word is divinely inspired and that he determines my morality. I’ve not even kissed a woman in 10 years because I was not willing to date someone and fall in love because my ex divorced me and I was not sure where I stood with marriage, divorce, and remarriage. I was not sure if the Pauline “exception” was real or not or if I was not understanding what being let lose of bondage meant in 1 corinthians 7.

After studying it out I have came to the conclusion that adultery is not the only reason for remarriage but that’s it’s also possible if your spouse is not a Christian and divorced you then you are set free. I was not a Christian when I got married. I became a Christian shortly after being married. So now I’m into my fourth year of being engaged to a woman I met through an arranged engagement that I entered by faith after praying and reading scripture.

So I’m constantly having to explain to Christians that I can believe 100%! In the Bible and still not believe it’s 100% literal but see the clear evidence that genesis 1-11 is not about literal history but setting up biblical patterns. After all you can read any 12 chapters of genesis 12+, exodus, acts and any other historical narrative basically and see a clear distinction in writing styles from genesis 1-11.

Yes and it is a common demonic tactic to try to shame someone like the 2nd link of yours I mentioned does .. I have no problem apologizing when I'm proved wrong but I don't do shame or carry guilt anymore especially according to Gods Word and the closer I walk with it the better ....Mary doesn't like it when she is questioned or accused and then playing the victim is what I'm talking about, it is a common demonic stall tactic .. If and I don't think I'm wrong I'll just say at judgment ,''see, your Word says so right here Lord'' . It is the godless and liars who will give an account for leading and ruining innocent faith of many astray .. And there's plenty great Bible believing Christian scientists who get shut out and discredited from the mainstream establishment .. Are you not their friend and brother , do you even give them a chance, are you not curious, you are charged to judge rightly .. For instance, Godless scientists have proven and taught their Big Bang Theory how many times ? And about every ten years they change their proven previous bbtheory to the latest newest proven bbtheory just as true until they change again , it is quite comical, yet the Word of God remains true and unchanable from the beginning .. I thank God for the real Christian scientists and their contributions , Dr James Tour is one of thousands of genius Christian bible believing scientists who crush abiogenesis and evolution, they barely tolerate him in public .. Like man made global warming hoax , the establishment most times will not even debate with scientists who use actual facts and records vs computer models that have been programmed with deceptive lies . The Freon hoax was another lie about saving the ozone layer that didn't need saving because Dupont's patent and money from it was running out ..

Marriage ? I can't offer advice except to say ''once you decide to put Jesus first, for the good of the family, next then her, then yourself , once you lead by example and she eventually understands the family plan and you show you're for real about it .. You may get more wife than you ever thought possible .. Then remember to never give any one your whole heart but Jesus and never make her your god ahead of Jesus or you risk getting crushed, becoming one flesh with her as the weaker vessel, there's more than plenty room for all by putting Jesus first .. My house is not a church if it sounds that way but just established right rules based on biblical ethics everyone can benefit from and depend on ..

You believe genesis 1-11 is not literal but until 200 years 99% Christians did on back to creation, you're on the wrong team .. It is pagans who worship nature .. Look around and see who all else is on your team, I love all on my team and Jesus is my team captain .. Do you really think I question 6000 year creation any at all, no way , my faith has become substance ..''to he who has will be given more'' .. I like you but you have nothing but loopholes to chase and skirt truth .. If you only knew .. Humble yourself regroup and seek truth . No need to respond to every point made here unless you just want to discuss it .. God Bless

 

[Fundamental]

That’s the first problem. You are trying to discuss something that you don’t understand. I suggest reading a few things on transitional species first and learning what it is and how many their are.

Did you get in school the thesis on the evolution on horse hoves too?
It shows interesting stuff I am baffled about few evolutionists know about. It still is quite challenging for me till this day.

We should not “point” at others because they would understand wrong, but explain what we think to understand.
When people ask about Jesus we dont go asking to their definition about Jesus before answering about Jesus.
When we know Jesus our answers comes spontaneous without the need of googleing our Bible out. When we really know something we can translate complicated stuff to a 6 year old without any problems.

 

[bojack]

I’m not delusional. I’m asking you to explain what process could preserve soft tissue for 10,000 years and why can’t that work for millions of years.

Secondly I know evolution is the most likely answer because of science. It does not require faith. It’s not the Bible I have a problem with. It’s merely the literal interpretation of genesis 1-11. Which is definitely not the god inspired interpretation.

Lots of Christians do lose their faith in college. But it’s not because of science. Yes, they see the clear evidence and know that evolution is obviously true. But what makes them fall is being forced by people to either choose scientific evidence or a single interpretation of 11 chapters. That’s why BioLogos was created. It’s there to show Christians that a better interpretation of scripture is to see the actual mythological context of early genesis. That they can believe 100% in God, the Bible and in science.

Where did you come up with 10,000 , I said 4000 and since the flood and find that hard to believe except like I mentioned that God has preserved certain things to be exposed specifically in the ''End Time'' ..

 

[Fundamental]

Evilnotion (evolution), does not happen but on small scales and always the beast returns back to the mean from which it changed after the stressors are removed from it
Plusssss all we ever see is a loss in the original info from within the beast that the changes are forced upon my a stronger mind directing it’s will upon the beast and so if allowed to return to the mean afterwards? It can’t from these attempts of us as higher creatures forcing change on other creatures as data from the original source is lost and we have never added info but just lost it through mutations.
This is the main problem in the faith needed to uphold the evilnotionary faiths, never is information added to an organism but only mutations have we observed and that is a net loss and not a mindless adding of info into the DNA from countless years and nobody!-)

I see your point LookUp. But evolution is simply genetic changes.

Yes a cell always thrives to return to her original state. But evolution happens by reproduction. 2 heritable genepools coming together creating one new genepool. But when species get isolated or undergo a mass extinction there is not that much genetic variation present anymore forcing the species into another genetic fixation.
I don’t understand why they have to call the symbiosis of 2 genetic genepools “a mutation”? The only way to add/lose genetic information is by reproducing it. Life can only create life, biogenesis.

The problem with evolutionists is that they see something happen and bring up the wildest theories and hypothesis to establish what they WANT to believe. Evolution by mutation did their theory no good. It is complete pseudoscience

 

[Fundamental]

All the data indicates we evolved from a fish. That’s what evolutionist teach as well.

I posted the links before. The actual scientist who found the soft tissue is a Christian who believes in evolution. The actual scientist who found it talks about how it occurred and now that we know to look for it, they are finding it in many things. It’s a testament to evolution, not something that undermines it.

It does not or you would be sharing the data crystal clear without pussy footing around it with many words. You simply repeat what has been repeated by others over the years. Repeating the same lie over and over again doesn’t make it true.

 

[Fundamental]

I am also accused by Christians for not having faith in God or the Bible. Which is ridiculous. I constantly bring up my faith. I’m not ashamed of it or Christ. I’m not ashamed that I believe in God and that includes that his word is divinely inspired and that he determines my morality.

Your Bible teaches that those bones (humanlike) being excavated are not your ancestors but related in another way. Through interbreeding.
That all these species on earth got saved by God working through a man, on a boat. Those species on that boat created all this bio diversity today. (And of course the creatures in water having survived the flood).

 

[wattie]

While the Bible is known to make gigantic leaps in time without specific details. It seems at first sight Abraham was born about 2000 years after Adam. This would show us a young creation according to our Bible.

Yet science had me almost convinced our earth is billions of years old. But knowing they lie and mock anyone raising serious questions I denounced science when it comes to our origins. I was really devoted in my studies but all I found was slander, corruptions, half truths to sell a full lie...

Yet my own mind raised a serious question last night: If our God is infinite, why would He only start creating roughly 6000 to 10000 years ago?

Maybe I should rewatch my beliefs on this and only see human life as a young creation? Any insight in this is very welcomed.

I've struggled with this a lot. The difference is so massive between millions and millions of years and 6 to 10 thousand years.

I am convinced though that the bible doesn't really have any fit with millions of years. The only way it could think is if the millions of years was pre the days of creation in the bible. The days in Gensis themselves just dont give any millions of years indication. The main issue being of a person bring created between days.. if they are created on a certain day and then the next is supposed to be millions or thousands of years .. that person becomes over a thousand or million years old.

But I like the idea of God creating a matured creation. A young earth but looks 'old'


This way you can still have mountains growing at a very slow rate , but they dont have to be millions of years old because they were initially formed mature.

Fast creation and then steady, slow growth

 

[Lookupnotback]

I see your point LookUp. But evolution is simply genetic changes.

Yes a cell always thrives to return to her original state. But evolution happens by reproduction. 2 heritable genepools coming together creating one new genepool. But when species get isolated or undergo a mass extinction there is not that much genetic variation present anymore forcing the species into another genetic fixation.
I don’t understand why they have to call the symbiosis of 2 genetic genepools “a mutation”? The only way to add/lose genetic information is by reproducing it. Life can only create life, biogenesis.

The problem with evolutionists is that they see something happen and bring up the wildest theories and hypothesis to establish what they WANT to believe. Evolution by mutation did their theory no good. It is complete pseudoscience

...but the change you reaching for is the addition of DNA information, and that just does not happen without a force from outside inflicting it will upon it. Naturally nothing has ever had a “gain” of data but only losses through mutation. Your faith in pseudoscience reveals your lack of knowledge in what we actually know of the processes you wish would happen vs the reality that we know through scientific study.

 

[Skovand]

Your Bible teaches that those bones (humanlike) being excavated are not your ancestors but related in another way. Through interbreeding.
That all these species on earth got saved by God working through a man, on a boat. Those species on that boat created all this bio diversity today. (And of course the creatures in water having survived the flood).

That’s definitely not what the bible teaches.

 

[Skovand]

It does not or you would be sharing the data crystal clear without pussy footing around it with many words. You simply repeat what has been repeated by others over the years. Repeating the same lie over and over again doesn’t make it true.

The data I’ve shared is completely crystal clear. There is a reason why over 99% of all scientists believe it including those that also believe in God and goes to church it’s also why every year more and more Christians believe it as well. In 10 years more Christians will believe in evolution than not. Young earth creationism is one of the devils best tools of using misguided and out of context readings of scripture to drive people away. The number one reason why Christians abandon the faith is because they are deceived into believing that to believe the Bible is to believe in a literal interpretation of genesis 1-2.

You simply don’t know the science and can’t provide another scientific explanation at all. Saying God did it in six days because that’s how you interpret the book is not science.

 

[Lookupnotback]

That’s definitely not what the bible teaches.

Yes, remember that the tree of life? It show as not from the trunk upwards with branches, twigs and leaves extending outwards but study shows us an ever shrinking level of biodiversity and so the diagrams should really be from the roots upwards shrinking inwards as you move inwards towards the trunk as a single stock

 

[Skovand]

There are literally hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed published papers in scientific journals by exerts in their field with Ph.Ds talking about the evolution of this or that species, this or that genus, family clade and kingdom.

 

[Skovand]

Yes, remember that the tree of life? It show as not from the trunk upwards with branches, twigs and leaves extending outwards but study shows us an ever shrinking level of biodiversity and so the diagrams should really be from the roots upwards shrinking inwards as you move inwards towards the trunk as a single stock

The tree of life ( the evolution based one and not the garden of eden one ) is simply a overly simplified symbolic image of descent. The decrease of biodiversity is not related to some kind of reversal towards the trunk. We are getting further and further away from the trunk. Some lineages have shrunk in biodiversity and others have grown. Our own family trees shows the same thing essentially. There are always more family dead than alive.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

he actual scientist who found it talks about how it occurred and now that we know to look for it, they are finding it in many things.

She might have degree in science but she is no scientist according to her own words. She is a data producer.

"But I have no agenda, except to produce data." BioLogos

That statement by Mary Schweitzer sounds like what is referred unto as an 'spontaneous utterance", it is a statement made by a person where their subconscious overrides their conscious mind that when made reveals or acknowledge something that the person will not consciously admit or acknowledge.

Scientist with an agenda do not make-up or fabricate data but collect data because the agenda of science is simply the scientific method. The scientific method is the process a scientist uses in evaluating whether collected data affirms a proposed explanation for the reason of things in the known and observed world.

An example of producing data is the rainbow in Genesis 9:14 "And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:". And in such, those who don't believe something is true will naturally accept an alternative explanation without regard to whether or not that alternative explanation is true or not.

But your denial of the data being literal is no worse than those accept the rainbow as evidence the data as literal. At best the data shows Bob Dylan's hypothesis that both are like rolling stones is true when they realize what a believer feels ain't so real, and refraction doesn't bend the light, except to a certain degree and along that line the multicolored band of refracted can't be seen as a rainbow except but for the bow in the cloud.

But I digress, so if the bone with soft tissue is claimed to be 68 million years then how do you accurately date it considering that one could argue that bones are not made out carbon but calcium, wholly different element. Couldn't resist that one but at least I didn't say rainbows were the result of light refraction.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

That’s definitely not what the bible teaches.

The LORD is the teacher.

 

[Rebelfortruth]

In my beliefs it seems that the Bible indicates before Adam sinned there was no death in the world...... Genesis 3:22-24 and the Lord God said, behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: therefore the Lord God sent him forth from The Garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken _ That scripture alone tells us that the fruit of the Tree of Life gave mankind healing / immortality. Also mentioned in the Book of Revelation...... Romans 5:12 wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and death so passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. It clearly says Adam's sin is the reason death is in the world and immortality was taken away and further reading tells us through Christ immortality can be regained. As well as 1st Corinthians 15:21-22...... It has been taught by the earliest established churches centuries ago and pass down through the generations, that Adam fell the day or at least the year he was created - and they say the creation of Adam took place six thousand years ago. They completely misunderstood scripture and omitted scripture in their analysis..... A few have come to realize that it was 6000 years ago when Adam sinned and fell from grace. Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiply and had begun to replenish some of the Earth. That is the reasoning why the Land of Nod existed, people were already there: they were the descendants of Adam before sin. Adam and Eve lived thousands of years before he sinned and had thousands of children. Children who migrated over the earth. Scripture had no need to mention the people before sin except for Cain's wife...... we also must remember a day to the Lord is as a thousand years and A Thousand Years is as one day. There is no time limit on God and nothing he does - he is not subjected to time, he established time for man to live by.

 

[Lanolin]

my observation (Im not a trained scientist, just an emprical scientist who has hypothesis just like everyone else) is that geologists have it wrong and are measuring things with the wrong measure. They are looking at layers of soil and making the wrong concluisions about how it was formed and how old it is.
a mountain can actually be formed in a day, even a couple of hours anyone witnessing an eruption of a volcano can attest to that.

another thing people dont get is that populations migrate, it isnt always the case that they have adapted once they got to a certain conditions that suited them to survive, Those that couldnt handle it moved somewhere else or they died out.

 

[Lanolin]

some scientific theories are so myopic they ought to be tossed out on the heap of all the other bizarre theories theyve come up with to explain why things are the way they are.

its like someone trying to read a book and only looking at the pictures and ignoring all the words and trying to make up a story about what happened.

 

[Skovand]

She might have degree in science but she is no scientist according to her own words. She is a data producer.

"But I have no agenda, except to produce data." BioLogos[/URL

That statement by Mary Schweitzer sounds like what is referred unto as an 'spontaneous utterance", it is a statement made by a person where their subconscious overrides their conscious mind that when made reveals or acknowledge something that the person will not consciously admit or acknowledge.

Scientist with an agenda do not make-up or fabricate data but collect data because the agenda of science is simply the scientific method. The scientific method is the process a scientist uses in evaluating whether collected data affirms a proposed explanation for the reason of things in the known and observed world.

An example of producing data is the rainbow in Genesis 9:14 "And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:". And in such, those who don't believe something is true will naturally accept an alternative explanation without regard to whether or not that alternative explanation is true or not.

But your denial of the data being literal is no worse than those accept the rainbow as evidence the data as literal. At best the data shows Bob Dylan's hypothesis that both are like rolling stones is true when they realize what a believer feels ain't so real, and refraction doesn't bend the light, except to a certain degree and along that line the multicolored band of refracted can't be seen as a rainbow except but for the bow in the cloud.

But I digress, so if the bone with soft tissue is claimed to be 68 million years then how do you accurately date it considering that one could argue that bones are not made out carbon but calcium, wholly different element. Couldn't resist that one but at least I didn't say rainbows were the result of light refraction.

Her statement is not denying she’s a scientist.... she’s a scientist. What she’s saying is that her job as a scientist is simply to produce the data and that she has no secret agenda. Scientists dig out the data and interpret it as it teaches. They don’t have a agenda. They test hypothesis and sometimes are wrong showing they do t have agendas.

 

[Skovand]

my observation (Im not a trained scientist, just an emprical scientist who has hypothesis just like everyone else) is that geologists have it wrong and are measuring things with the wrong measure. They are looking at layers of soil and making the wrong concluisions about how it was formed and how old it is.
a mountain can actually be formed in a day, even a couple of hours anyone witnessing an eruption of a volcano can attest to that.

another thing people dont get is that populations migrate, it isnt always the case that they have adapted once they got to a certain conditions that suited them to survive, Those that couldnt handle it moved somewhere else or they died out.

Here is the issue with that.

1. They used multiple different sources of different elements to develop different times based off of half lives. So it’s not guess work.

2. The fossil record shows speciation in different geological layers. We don’t see bipedal apes in the Cretaceous. We don’t see humans in the Cretaceous. We don’t see T. rex or any other creature in the same time period with tool marks on their bones and so on. Each layer has different species from big and small, plant and animal, that is not in other layers.