GIDEON MAGE Posted June 16, 2005 #1 Share Posted June 16, 2005 This has been bugging the heck out of me all my life. Xians are not alone on this concept. I have seen orthodox types come up with the same nonsense. I got this idea reading the prove evolution thread. The universe is simply not, I repeat not, 6000 years old. I will state the proof. Forget fossils; this is better. Look outside at night. What so you see? Stars? You are wrong. You are seeing a few million stars, in the local galaxy. You are also looking at billions of galaxies, each of which contains billions of stars. Follow me on this, please. We know the speed of light; I don't know a single Xian that can dispute this. If you don't know what a light-year is, it is the distance light travels in an earth year.Some of these stars and galaxies are millions of light-years away! This means, the universe has certainly existed long enough for the light to get here! Now I believe in God, and creation, but I disagree with a lot of you religious types. There is nothing to say that the "days" of Genesis 1 don't represent a much longer period of time. I have seen argument after argument about the "weeks" of daniel, etc. supposedly they mean a period of seventy years. Where is the proof of this? Why are Daniel's weeks supposed to be 70 years long, but the days of genesis just days? Where is the logic in this? Where is it stated to make this calculation? Don't you dare say the n.t.; I won't accept it!Why do you ignorantly refuse, if you can't for some weird reason accept evolution, to at least give the scientists some credit. We know the age of the universe, because we know the speed of light; it is one of the few constants, other than god, in the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted June 16, 2005 #2 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Pffft... God made it look that way... Easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Something Like Laughter Posted June 16, 2005 #3 Share Posted June 16, 2005 There is nothing to say that the "days" of Genesis 1 don't represent a much longer period of time.savor this moment GM, it may be the only time i agree with you. Here is the lexicon entry for the hebrew word yowm, which is the word translated as day throughout Gen 1. http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/wor...rd=03117&page=1 especially note 1.c, 1.d, and 1.e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaus Posted June 16, 2005 #4 Share Posted June 16, 2005 The bible... like good poetry... IS A METAPHOR!!! stupid people dont ever realise that and they just blindly follow their religion... like sheep. Like stupid fluffy white sheep, who at the end of the day get eaten by wolves... i would rather be the wolf. Not the stupid sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 16, 2005 Author #5 Share Posted June 16, 2005 savor this moment GM, it may be the only time i agree with you. sorry i took so long to respond. the paramedics just left. I'm ok. The bible... like good poetry... IS A METAPHOR!!! i think a lot of the bible is a metaphor-that doesn't mean it is completely untrue, just extremely hard to follow. there is a lot of good morality, as long as we accept that the history is shaky, and the time-lines fuzzy at best. but what about the weeks in daniel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Link of Hyrule Posted June 16, 2005 #6 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Ho hum. another time-line question. To God, a day is a thousand years and a thousand years a day. God lives outside of time. Heck, GOd created time. How can it be so hard to imagine that the seven days are not literal. Moreover, there is evidence that the Genesis account is not literal. After all, it was written long after the actual event. Look at the poetic nature of the account. Whether it's literal, or a metaphor for evolution, the fact of Genesis 1 is clear: GOD DID IT! And if it is literal, think on this. If God created Adam a fully grown adult, why can He not do the same for the Earth? He could have created a fully formed Earth with history, records, fossils etc. The fact is we don't know. We can only hypothesize. The account in Genesis wasn't created to be a scientific, explain-all account, rather it was written to portray a message. I said it before: GOD DID IT! Until next time, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperactive Posted June 16, 2005 #7 Share Posted June 16, 2005 And if it is literal, think on this. If God created Adam a fully grown adult, why can He not do the same for the Earth? He could have created a fully formed Earth with history, records, fossils etc. indeed, in so far that time is an illusion and the past, and future are persistant fallacies. however, i wonder about why so many religious folk justify the belief of "poof, there it was" when their gods do it, yet so often misunderstand the big bang and falsely discredit it for "poof, there it was". there is no reason in religion, and no religion in reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Link of Hyrule Posted June 16, 2005 #8 Share Posted June 16, 2005 however, i wonder about why so many religious folk justify the belief of "poof, there it was" when their gods do it, yet so often misunderstand the big bang and falsely discredit it for "poof, there it was". there is no reason in religion, and no religion in reason. 679530[/snapback] The difference is that the Big Bang does not take God into account. God can create something out of nothing. That's why he's God. But the natural laws claim that it simply is not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperactive Posted June 16, 2005 #9 Share Posted June 16, 2005 the natural laws and "gods" have one thing in common; they are both human constructs that are false! a great human error is to create something in the head and then assume it exists outside the head just becuase it is inside the head. make it up, make it up, make it all up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 16, 2005 Author #10 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I have never understood why scientists and creationists both refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe - god made the universe by the big bang.the catholic church, for all it's faults, is actually open to this concept... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venomshocker Posted June 16, 2005 #11 Share Posted June 16, 2005 because we know the speed of light; it is one of the few constants, other than god, in the universe. Alot of physists now believe the speed of light is NOT a constant. Check out the theories of Joao Magueijo. http://frontwheeldrive.com/joao_magueijo.html This could change the way we look at the universe forever!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tupac amaru Posted June 16, 2005 #12 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Alot of physists now believe the speed of light is NOT a constant. Check out the theories of Joao Magueijo. I am no physicist, but my understanding of Dr. Magueijo's work is that he says that light can't go slower than the accepted speed of light, but depending on energy and Space Time conditions can actually go faster. IF my understanding of the matter is true, then it doesn't help the Creationists view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Link of Hyrule Posted June 16, 2005 #13 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I have never understood why scientists and creationists both refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe - god made the universe by the big bang.the catholic church, for all it's faults, is actually open to this concept... 679548[/snapback] I was under the impression that that's what I was alluding to. To God, a day is a thousand years and a thousand years a day. God lives outside of time. Heck, GOd created time. How can it be so hard to imagine that the seven days are not literal. Moreover, there is evidence that the Genesis account is not literal. After all, it was written long after the actual event. Look at the poetic nature of the account. Whether it's literal, or a metaphor for evolution, the fact of Genesis 1 is clear: GOD DID IT! That's part of what I posted earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted June 16, 2005 #14 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Well I see this question comes up often. There are only two hard core facts at this time and they are one. 1. Scientists can not agree as to how old mankind is and so is uncertain. 2. Creationists have an idea based on the scriptures but are uncertain. Uncertain + Uncertain = 42! But I am not sure if that is the Answer! Um! I guess I will stick with the known facts till proved otherwise! Irish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperactive Posted June 16, 2005 #15 Share Posted June 16, 2005 vsl is almost 100 years old. it was dismissed for so long in large part because it did not fit the mindset of physics of the 1900's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 16, 2005 Author #16 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Well I see this question comes up often. There are only two hard core facts at this time and they are one. 1. Scientists can not agree as to how old mankind is and so is uncertain. 2. Creationists have an idea based on the scriptures but are uncertain. Uncertain + Uncertain = 42! But I am not sure if that is the Answer! Um! I guess I will stick with the known facts till proved otherwise! Irish 680192[/snapback] But we know the speed of light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venomshocker Posted June 16, 2005 #17 Share Posted June 16, 2005 IF my understanding of the matter is true, then it doesn't help the Creationists view. But we know the speed of light. Lol, not it does not help the creationist point of view, its not supposed too. I just wanted to point out that the belief that the speed of light is this unchanging constant is not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saucy Posted June 16, 2005 #18 Share Posted June 16, 2005 What a lot of people don't realize concerning creation is that when God created everything, it was created in its most mature and grown state. All the trees where in full bloom and producing fruit. Adam and Eve were mature adults. All the animals were fully grown and able to reproduce. The stars and universe was also created in it's fully mature state. People need to stop assuming that science has everything figured how. How can they prove things such as the age of universe? How stars work and how old they are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperactive Posted June 16, 2005 #19 Share Posted June 16, 2005 and yet another "poofda"..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 16, 2005 Author #20 Share Posted June 16, 2005 What a lot of people don't realize concerning creation is that when God created everything, it was created in its most mature and grown state. All the trees where in full bloom and producing fruit. Adam and Eve were mature adults. All the animals were fully grown and able to reproduce. The stars and universe was also created in it's fully mature state. People need to stop assuming that science has everything figured how. How can they prove things such as the age of universe? How stars work and how old they are? 681246[/snapback] all we need is the speed of light, to disprove the xian notion of a 6000 year universe. It doesn't mean there is no God! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Greenman Posted June 17, 2005 #21 Share Posted June 17, 2005 (edited) I don't think any of it is real. I am just a butterfly sleeping on a flower having a nightmare that I am a human being. Somebody wake me up please. Edited June 17, 2005 by Darkwind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 17, 2005 Author #22 Share Posted June 17, 2005 funny-chuang tzu had that same dream... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melladior Posted June 17, 2005 #23 Share Posted June 17, 2005 I'm all for healthy debate, but I'm also for freedom of religion. There are too many uncertainties in the cosmos, and if religion helps people understand themselves or gives them comfort, I don't see the point of nonbelievers dissecting it or calling believers stupid or ignorant. Discourse is wonderful, but I think most would agree that name calling has no place in a healthy debate. "Why do you ignorantly refuse, if you can't for some weird reason accept evolution, to at least give the scientists some credit" "stupid people don't ever realise that and they just blindly follow their religion... like sheep. Like stupid fluffy white sheep, who at the end of the day get eaten by wolves... i would rather be the wolf. Not the stupid sheep." By the way, science isn't infallible, either. Remember DDT? The brontosaurus? Asbestos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIDEON MAGE Posted June 19, 2005 Author #24 Share Posted June 19, 2005 so can anyone explain, using logic, how the weeks become conveniently years? and how the days of genesis are just days? c'mon, guys! i went to that one website where an apologist claimed a different plural ending changed the meaning of weeks, but that is poor scholarship. Hebrew changed continually during the writing of the tanach, nouns changed gender, endings, many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Link of Hyrule Posted June 19, 2005 #25 Share Posted June 19, 2005 so can anyone explain, using logic, how the weeks become conveniently years? and how the days of genesis are just days? c'mon, guys! i went to that one website where an apologist claimed a different plural ending changed the meaning of weeks, but that is poor scholarship. Hebrew changed continually during the writing of the tanach, nouns changed gender, endings, many times. 685871[/snapback] I did explain it. Go back and read my first post on this topic. I'll even give you the link. My post It's post #6 by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now