Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
manbearpigg

Problem of Evil

283 posts in this topic

Carbon 14 has a half life of 5,700 years, so carbon dating is only somewhat accurate up to a point. Linen wrapping from the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, dated to the 1st or 2nd century B.C.E. at 1,900 years. In 1969 a conference was held in Uppsala, Sweden where archaeologists and geologists discussed a dozen flaws in carbon dating. The possibility of contamination by live carbon with dead. From a biblical perspective there is the very real possibility for there having been a change in the atmosphere were carbon levels dramatically changed. Magnetic storms on the sun can increase cosmic rays a thousandfold in a few hours. Volcanic eruptions, even modern day pollution.

Ok, so maybe not Carbon dating. Obviously I'm not much of a scientist either. In any case, as mentioned, the only people who disagree with the 40 thousand years of Aboriginal life in Australia are the people who believe human life has only been on the planet for 6000 years. At least, I have never met someone who believes in millions of years of evolution who then says Aboriginals have only been here for a few thousand years in Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so maybe not Carbon dating. Obviously I'm not much of a scientist either. In any case, as mentioned, the only people who disagree with the 40 thousand years of Aboriginal life in Australia are the people who believe human life has only been on the planet for 6000 years. At least, I have never met someone who believes in millions of years of evolution who then says Aboriginals have only been here for a few thousand years in Australia.

Well, it goes both ways, I suppose. Those who believe in evolution believe their evidence and those who believe the Bible believe their evidence. Many of the Aboriginals who adhere to an accurate understanding of the Holi Baibul would disagree with the estimation of science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it goes both ways, I suppose. Those who believe in evolution believe their evidence and those who believe the Bible believe their evidence. Many of the Aboriginals who adhere to an accurate understanding of the Holi Baibul would disagree with the estimation of science.

Actually they are quite different. One side is coming in with a preconception, the other is not. The thought processes behind one group goes as follows - "What can science tell us about the origins of humans". From there they test and arrive at a hypothesis which is either validated or disregarded. In contrast, the thought process behind the other group is totally different, and goes along these lines - "We know that humanity has been here for six thousand years, so let's find the evidence from science to back it up".

You see how these are different?

For the record, I believe I hold an accurate understanding of the Bible, but at the same time I'm happy to accept that Genesis 1-3 (actually, Genesis 1-11, but we'll focus on the creation accounts in the first three chapters) was not written as a scientific or historical account of creation, and therefore I have zero problem with thinking of humanity existing for much longer than six thousand years.

~ Regards, PA

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carbon 14 has a half life of 5,700 years, so carbon dating is only somewhat accurate up to a point. Linen wrapping from the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, dated to the 1st or 2nd century B.C.E. at 1,900 years. In 1969 a conference was held in Uppsala, Sweden where archaeologists and geologists discussed a dozen flaws in carbon dating.

Ofcourse they would it as these measurement techniques are part of the profession, the flaws are known but not as exaggerated as creationists like to pretend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B.C.E.

4026, Adam created

What is the basis for this date? The reason I ask is that usually the 6,000 year figure is based on genealogies, but there are serious issues with the use of the genealogies for this purpose. Article: The Genesis Genealogies: Are They Complete?

I believe the Bible to be God's Word and to be true and accurate, but like PA, I believe one has to keep in mind the literary forms that were used in different books and even in different passages within books. I also believe that many of the things Christians believe to be Biblical are actually based more on tradition than on a proper, contextual understanding of Scripture.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since mankind got whittled down to 8 people, they were the only source of knowledge for the antediluvian world. Do you suppose that Noah had writings of that history, or did he carry it in the form of oral history? (That also sort of applies to the Aboriginal question earlier; don't they rely on oral history, so the possibility is that their dates are off?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since mankind got whittled down to 8 people, they were the only source of knowledge for the antediluvian world. Do you suppose that Noah had writings of that history, or did he carry it in the form of oral history? (That also sort of applies to the Aboriginal question earlier; don't they rely on oral history, so the possibility is that their dates are off?)

Actually, they would not have been the only source. After all, the Bible is inspired by God who was three before creation, before the flood, and is still here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God "and his muses" have proven to be far more accurate. In another thread I point out that the life expectancy given by science for King David's time was 35 - 40 years when he himself wrote it was 70 - 80. The basis of science on the matter is conjecture, whereas David was there.

You're understanding of life expectancy seems to be about on par with rest of your understanding of that ev-uhal!1! science!@1!

Here, read, learn, its free--It wont hurt either. Bring a little more education to the bible belt! It's written by a Christian too no doubt.

Edited by Copasetic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.