getting dates about a young earth

[Bowman]

They probably didn't have atheistic universities spending billions over many decades to prop up evolution "theory", which "theory" didn't exist according to known record.

Now they are spending fortunes trying to explain how soft skin tissue and veins holding blood cells and elastic tissues in dinosaur fossils believed to be tens of millions of years old, are showing heavy evidence of age no more than a few thousand years.

All of their old age dating methods exist on the grace of circular reasoning as how to calibrate their methods. Assumptions that rock layers (strata) are currently accomplished very slowly gives them comfort to assume billions of years in the making, allowing for beliefs of very old ages. Fossils in those strata are aged according to those assumptions. Nevermind that recent volcanic eruptions in our time are being dated as millions of years past.

Soft tissue discoveries in fossils does not negate radiometric dating methods.

 

[Word_Swordsman]

Soft tissue discoveries in fossils does not negate radiometric dating methods.

Fossils supposedly over 65 million years should not be scientifically expected to have non-mineralized organic cells
such as hemoglobin, chitin, silk, DNA, melanin, etc. as are known to exist. There is speculation those were known about decades ago, but lacking explanations, the knowledge has remained buried until recently. Chemically it would be impossible for such cellular material not to have been mineralized. The very nature of passage of the ions through rock strata makes preservation of organics impossible, the very ions and changess of them being the basis of radiometric dating.

Radiometric dating is based on many unobserved assumptions/concepts favored by evolutionists. The ways the methods are calibrated are contaminated by their circular reasoning. Regardless, having well preserved organic cells within mineralized fossil remains ought to increasingly place evolution in it's proper place (mysticism).

That subject alone points to T rex and others having lived a few thousand years ago. But I agree that to date there is apparently no science data pinpointing the age of earth to 6,000 years. Edgar Rice Burroughs could have stretched it out to maybe a million years with convincing prose with or without any science backing. The evidence examined without evolution bias is pointing to a very young earth, less than 10,000 years.

During my last geology course field trip we examined a very large quarry. As expected our guide explained the hundreds of rock strata represented a huge slice of geologic time, showing most of the "geologic column". He refused to try explaining how all that sediment could remain plastic enough to tolerate the extreme folding (180 degrees vertical) without leaving at least microscopic fracturing. That was a 21 year old college senior who had done his homework. The only plausible answer is all of that sediment was laid down suddenly, day by day, then heaved up to present position, then hardened. Currently such deposits can harden into rock in a matter of decades. The guide's answer to that was we know the ages of deposition by the fossils in each layer, and radiometric dating, all of which is calibrated by methods fashioned by evolutionists. Besides, if an exam contains questions about that quarry, be advised to supply the official answers, as it is these days too. So for the interim we all "agreed" with evolution. It's the game they play, on their own field, and their ball.

Many evolutionists are doubtless anxiously awaiting retirement before the head of evolution is finally blown off publicly by real science. It already has been mortally wounded, but academia is ruled by secular scientists who insist on making science fiction into "science" without the benefit of real science. Follow the money.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

If you really understood what the Gap idea is about, you would know how it was that Apostle Paul showed in Rom.8 that God placed His creation in a state of bondage to corruption, and His creation like us, seeks a release from that bondage state. What that especially reveals is that God did NOT originally make His creation in that bondage state it's been in, and still is in today. What we see today with His creation, is not how He originally created it, is what that especially reveals. That's what you are lacking in understanding about, i.e., His original creation.

Creation did not come into bondage until the created sinned.

You can blame adam and eve for that..

God is going to restore creation to its previously fallen state, The state it was before the fall of man, Not pre genesis 1.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

One can think or believe the earth is old or new without proof. There was a lot incorrect theories back then, it was generally believe the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.

True, that was generally believed, But I believe those who studied scripture believed it was a globe.. Most prophesies would not work on a flat earth they Why God explained the earth..

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I'm asking where is the Bible Scripture to show the time of Adam's fall was when God placed His creation in the state of vanity and bondage Paul spoke of in Romans 8.

I know the Scriptures where God said He did not create the earth in that state, and where He shows it in that state Paul preached per Rom.8. But where is the Scripture support for it happening at the time of Adam's fall which some here think?

Gen 3:
[SUP]17 [/SUP]Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’:
“Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
[SUP]18[/SUP]Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
[SUP]19 [/SUP]In the sweat of your face you shall eat breadTill you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.”

 

[eternally-gratefull]

interesting question, is creation cursed?

the snake is cursed, the ground is cursed.
prophecies are given about adam and eve.

the ground curse seems to be removed after the flood.

Interesting. Can you explain what you mean by this?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

a 24 hour day IS NOT a morning and evening. Use you common sense. And MY God certainly didn't need to rest. You just make it what you want.

Does not matter,

Evening and morning shows that he is talking about days. Not millions of years.

Next

 

[eternally-gratefull]

YEC's make Adam out to be superman.

How many things did he supposedly do in 24hrs?

We make God superman.. He can create the heavens and the earth in as little as 6 days.

Adam, was perfect. He could do things we can not fathom, But he was not God.. But he could do whatever God told him to do, because God empwers those who are his to do what he desires.. So again, All credit is given to God. Not adam.

 

[valiant]

Does not matter,

Evening and morning shows that he is talking about days. Not millions of years.

Next

LOL evening (end) and morning (beginning) tells us nothing about whether He is talking about days, or millions of years,

 

[Dan_473]

YEC's make Adam out to be superman.

How many things did he supposedly do in 24hrs?

God is involved in bringing the animals to adam, so not so much superman, superGod.

I don't know if you read some of the previous posts about maybe adam not giving names to every species in the animal kingdom.

myself, I think he named catagories, maybe some of the individual large land animals.

 

[Dan_473]

Pretty bogus, brother.

Your worldview of Adam, as superman, was created as a full-grown adult, already knew how to speak, named all animals on the planet, tilled the garden, and realized that he was lonely...all in 24hrs!

Little wonder that seekers are turning away from Christianity when they see this type of belief system.....for them, sci-fi is more believable than the YEC interpretation...

Elijah went up to heaven in a windstorm... is Elijah superman?

as I read it, God is the one who realizes that adam needs a helper.

how many animals do you figure adam named?

 

[Dan_473]

Where did I say God "had" to rest? I just quoted scripture. And when did I say "only God is good?" You might want to reread my post there fella. You have taken my post and done what you accuse others of doing with scripture...twisted it to fit your agenda (whatever that may be). Don't put words into my mouth. As stated in earlier post...you don't know me. God does. Thank you.

oddly enough, about the "only God is good"

Jesus basically says, "No one is good except one, and that's God."

 

[Dan_473]

Sorry Dan, this is just not right. The OT was originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic in a few places. When Alexander the Great came along, he decided to "Hellenized" the known world. That meant Greek language and culture took over. It also meant many of the Jews who were dispersed had lost their Hebrew language.

So one of the Ptolomies in Egypt got together a group of Jewish Scholars, supposedly 70, whch is why the Septuagint is named the way it is. They translated the Old Testament into Greek. There are stories about it being "inspired" but since there are a lot of differences between the Hebrew Text and the LXX, I would say not.

a few comments...

the original hebrew writings of the ot were inspired.
they are lost.
what we generally use today is the masoretic text, which may or may not be an inspired copy.

yes, there are lots of differences between the lxx and the masoretic.
God hasn't given us a way to verify which matches the original hebrew.

(be kind of cool if we could do a checksum, like computers use to see if files are corrupted.
but God must have a good reason for not doing that.)

is the lxx disregarded because it doesn't match the masoretic,
or the masoretic is disregarded because it doesn't match the lxx?

 

[Dan_473]

Interesting. Can you explain what you mean by this?

sure

in genesis 8, after the flood, God says, "I will never again curse the ground because of humans."

 

[eternally-gratefull]

sure

in genesis 8, after the flood, God says, "I will never again curse the ground because of humans."

ok I see,

well he said he would never destroy all life,, Even in matt 24, he said things will get so bad if he did not return all flesh would be lost.

But this does not mean the ground is stil not cursed (the earth is still groaning today, due to the curse.. )

 

[valiant]

a few comments...

the original hebrew writings of the ot were inspired.
they are lost.
what we generally use today is the masoretic text, which may or may not be an inspired copy.

yes, there are lots of differences between the lxx and the masoretic.
God hasn't given us a way to verify which matches the original hebrew.

(be kind of cool if we could do a checksum, like computers use to see if files are corrupted.
but God must have a good reason for not doing that.)

is the lxx disregarded because it doesn't match the masoretic,
or the masoretic is disregarded because it doesn't match the lxx?

in other words everything is up for grabs we havn't got an inspired text

 

[valiant]

Elijah went up to heaven in a windstorm... is Elijah superman?

as I read it, God is the one who realizes that adam needs a helper.

how many animals do you figure adam named?

give or take a million or two if he named all those on the planet

 

[eternally-gratefull]

give or take a million or two if he named all those on the planet

How big was the ark?

You telling us Adam could not name every kind of creature on the ark in one day?

 

[Dan_473]

ok I see,

well he said he would never destroy all life,, Even in matt 24, he said things will get so bad if he did not return all flesh would be lost.

But this does not mean the ground is stil not cursed (the earth is still groaning today, due to the curse.. )

When God says he won't curse the ground again, to me that says the ground isn't currently cursed when God says that.
(certainly it was before.)

compare what Lamech basically says in genesis 5,
"Noah will comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, caused by the ground which the Lord has cursed."


note part of the curse, "thorns and thistles it shall grow for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field."
post-flood, noah plants a vineyard which is successful enough to get drunk on.
also post-flood, humans are allowed to eat meat.


to me, this is also important: here in the mid-west usa, there are lots of fields loaded with soybeans and corn.
imo, this wouldn't be possible if the ground is still cursed, unless human technology can overcome God's curse.

all flesh will die if Jesus doesn't return in time... that sounds right.
I expect Jesus will return before then,
so God won't destroy every living thing.

 

[Dan_473]

another thing I think is interesting: post-flood humans are allowed to eat meat, instead of just plants.

as I understand it, our teeth are those of omnivores, meat and plant eaters.
did pre-flood humans, including adam, have teeth like ours?
if not, did they have different genes?

if a scientist today finds a skull of a pre-flood person, and they see teeth capable of eating meat, will they be misled into thinking that person ate meat?