Age of the Earth?

[trying]

Are you young earth or old earth and why?

I'm young earth as I believe in a literal 7-day creation ....

[pneuma]

Are you young earth or old earth and why?

I'm young earth as I believe in a literal 7-day creation ....

I guess it depends on our age, I'm 47 so I guess you could say I'm middle earth :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:

[Taffy]

Hi Trying :icon_flower:

Ive not heard it put that way before :dontknow:
But im 47 as well..middle for mine as well :happy3:

Blessings
T

[Sarah]

I believe in an old earth.  I read a few 'science' books explaining why the earth was young, but much of it felt very cynical and a few 'reasons' seemed gatuitous(sp?).  It felt like the authors were stretching to make science fit into a certain perspective of Genesis. It is funny, but one thing that made it hard for me to believe the earth was young was the stars.  We know the speed of light, the size of stars, and it is a simple math calculation.  It just seems so illogical to say,"God can do anything, so couldn't he have just made the stars shine instantaneously onto earth?", kind of like the devil putting the dinosaur bones out to deceive the nations.

[Craig]

It doesn't matter to me, I wasn't alive when it happened to observe it. :D

[Michele]

The One branch of physics, which was painfully neglected through the ages, is the problematic physics of Time and its function. We do not know how long the first 3 minutes lasted after the Big Bang compared to our 3 minutes now.

No one understands how the universe can be younger -- according to newest finds -- than some of the oldest stars we see.~Isabel Piczek

[Craig]

The One branch of physics, which was painfully neglected through the ages, is the problematic physics of Time and its function. We do not know how long the first 3 minutes lasted after the Big Bang compared to our 3 minutes now.

No one understands how the universe can be younger -- according to newest finds -- than some of the oldest stars we see.~Isabel Piczek

Exactly, they falsely measure time through space believing that space and time are consistent in the universe. Time can be bent, wobbled, accelerated and slowed, just as space can be bent, wobbled, pulled and pushed. We have no idea how old our universe is, and will never know there can be parts of the universe which are older than the oldest parts of the universe, simply because time curvature.

[Molly]

The scientists needed to control time, making the speed of light a constant and the upper speed in the universe, in order for their phoney equation, E=MC (squared), to work.

As if matter blowing up to infinity works...

[trying]

I believe in an old earth.  I read a few 'science' books explaining why the earth was young, but much of it felt very cynical and a few 'reasons' seemed gatuitous(sp?).  It felt like the authors were stretching to make science fit into a certain perspective of Genesis. It is funny, but one thing that made it hard for me to believe the earth was young was the stars.  We know the speed of light, the size of stars, and it is a simple math calculation.  It just seems so illogical to say,"God can do anything, so couldn't he have just made the stars shine instantaneously onto earth?", kind of like the devil putting the dinosaur bones out to deceive the nations.

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

[Paul Hazelwood]

I believe in an old earth.  I read a few 'science' books explaining why the earth was young, but much of it felt very cynical and a few 'reasons' seemed gatuitous(sp?).  It felt like the authors were stretching to make science fit into a certain perspective of Genesis. It is funny, but one thing that made it hard for me to believe the earth was young was the stars.  We know the speed of light, the size of stars, and it is a simple math calculation.  It just seems so illogical to say,"God can do anything, so couldn't he have just made the stars shine instantaneously onto earth?", kind of like the devil putting the dinosaur bones out to deceive the nations.

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

Boy, seen that coming.

Trying, Answers in Genesis is not Gods word. And that article, while possibly containing reasonable scientific facts, is still the use of what creation scientists believe to be science.  A debate on that fact not withstanding, I hope you see my point.

I am trying to prevent yet another thread from being locked as people start flinging around ridiculous accusations as your doing here.   Please stop.

[Paul Hazelwood]

For instance, from that article

It is perfectly acceptable for us to ask, "Did God use natural processes to get the starlight to earth in the biblical timescale? And if so, what is the mechanism?" But if no natural mechanism is apparent, this cannot be used as evidence against supernatural creation. So, the unbeliever is engaged in a subtle form of circular reasoning when he uses the assumption of naturalism to argue that distant starlight disproves the biblical timescale.

This is true, but the demeanor of creation scientists do not necessarily hold to their own rules of logic.

A natural mechanism that is not apparent does not prove that a supernatural event occured.  Disproving  a natural explanation leaving no explanation at all does not prove that the God of the holy bible was even the source of the occurance.

[willieH]

willieH: how-D!  :laughing7:

No matter who is calculating... they assume that TIME has flowed from the "beginning" unto the present, at the very same rate...

Along with flow rate, ...TIME is absolutely variable and relative...

TIME, within perceptions of present day experience, differs in perception, even from one scenario to another, such as:

A minute is 60 seconds in duration...  :dontknow:

But that "60 second" duration is percieved to be much LONGER to one being BURNED, ...then it is to one runnning in a RACE...

So TIME as a measureable entity, even from one scenario to another, differs in its percieved observeable duration...

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

[trying]

I believe in an old earth.  I read a few 'science' books explaining why the earth was young, but much of it felt very cynical and a few 'reasons' seemed gatuitous(sp?).  It felt like the authors were stretching to make science fit into a certain perspective of Genesis. It is funny, but one thing that made it hard for me to believe the earth was young was the stars.  We know the speed of light, the size of stars, and it is a simple math calculation.  It just seems so illogical to say,"God can do anything, so couldn't he have just made the stars shine instantaneously onto earth?", kind of like the devil putting the dinosaur bones out to deceive the nations.

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

Boy, seen that coming.

Trying, Answers in Genesis is not Gods word. And that article, while possibly containing reasonable scientific facts, is still the use of what creation scientists believe to be science.  A debate on that fact not withstanding, I hope you see my point.

I am trying to prevent yet another thread from being locked as people start flinging around ridiculous accusations as your doing here.   Please stop.

Last I checked, nobody is flinging around anything.............

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

[Paul Hazelwood]

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

ok, then explain why you accuse someone of putting science above Gods word while posting a link to a scientific article at AIG?

[trying]

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

ok, then explain why you accuse someone of putting science above Gods word while posting a link to a scientific article at AIG?

Because the person brought up the issue of Star light as in "how can we distant star light if the Universe is young?"  That's what Science teaches the Bible clearly states the world and universe was created in 6-days..

I listed the AIG link as I find their hypothesis to be very well thought out one that sounds plausable...

[willieH]

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

One necessary "point" is...

If you do NOT consider the "BIBLE" (translations of Scripture into English) as GOD's WORD...

Then in order for most to understand where you are coming from as a discussionist, you must define to us, what you percieve "GOD's WORD" to be, brother Trying...  :dontknow:

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

[trying]

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

One necessary "point" is...

If you do NOT consider the "BIBLE" (translations of Scripture into English) as GOD's WORD...

Then in order for most to understand where you are coming from as a discussionist, you must define to us, what you percieve "GOD's WORD" to be, brother Trying...  :dontknow:

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

The Bible clearly tells us that CHRIST is "God's Word" ..... 

[Craig]

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

One necessary "point" is...

If you do NOT consider the "BIBLE" (translations of Scripture into English) as GOD's WORD...

Then in order for most to understand where you are coming from as a discussionist, you must define to us, what you percieve "GOD's WORD" to be, brother Trying...  :dontknow:

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

The Bible clearly tells us that CHRIST is "God's Word" ..... 

Amen! That is what the Lord told me, when He called me, "Student of the Word." The Word is not the Bible, it is Christ. :D Glad this is the first thing that comes to mind when you think Word!

[Paul Hazelwood]

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

ok, then explain why you accuse someone of putting science above Gods word while posting a link to a scientific article at AIG?

Because the person brought up the issue of Star light as in "how can we distant star light if the Universe is young?"  That's what Science teaches the Bible clearly states the world and universe was created in 6-days..

I listed the AIG link as I find their hypothesis to be very well thought out one that sounds plausable...

The bible is not as clear as it is made out to be on the subject.   Science is merely the interpretation of data.

Explain why the 6 day account in scripture must be 6 - 24 hour days as we measure time?

[trying]

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

ok, then explain why you accuse someone of putting science above Gods word while posting a link to a scientific article at AIG?

Because the person brought up the issue of Star light as in "how can we distant star light if the Universe is young?"  That's what Science teaches the Bible clearly states the world and universe was created in 6-days..

I listed the AIG link as I find their hypothesis to be very well thought out one that sounds plausable...

The bible is not as clear as it is made out to be on the subject.   Science is merely the interpretation of data.

Explain why the 6 day account in scripture must be 6 - 24 hour days as we measure time?

First off, it's qualified by the terms "day and night"....

Secondly.. it's the same word in the hebrew "yom'.... as used in Noah's account... and other places in the OT...

Did noah float around for 40 days and nights or was it 40 years? If we're going to call that period 24hours days.. then we must do the same in Genesis 1...

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Trying...  :happygrin:

I certainly agree that CHRIST is the WORD...  :thumbsup:  but please, if you would, ...be more specific, as to what you consider as that WORD...

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

One necessary "point" is...

If you do NOT consider the "BIBLE" (translations of Scripture into English) as GOD's WORD...

Then in order for most to understand where you are coming from as a discussionist, you must define to us, what you percieve "GOD's WORD" to be, brother Trying...  :dontknow:

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I mean this reply to be non-combative, and in loving respect, but I believe you are still being unclear as to WHAT you determine and to BE, and USE as GOD's WORD...

The Bible clearly tells us that CHRIST is "God's Word" ..... 

So are you saying you believe the BIBLE?

What is CHRIST to you?  And HOW do you determine what HIS WORDS are, brother T?

Are you saying that anything IN the BIBLE which is not a "quotation" of CHRIST's SPOKEN WORDS... is NOT His WORD?  :JCThink:  (i.e. the letters, the torah, the prophets, etc.)

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

[trying]

willieH: Hi Trying...  :happygrin:

I certainly agree that CHRIST is the WORD...  :thumbsup:  but please, if you would, ...be more specific, as to what you consider as that WORD...

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I never claimed AIG is God's Word, and neither is the Bible.... so what's your point?

One necessary "point" is...

If you do NOT consider the "BIBLE" (translations of Scripture into English) as GOD's WORD...

Then in order for most to understand where you are coming from as a discussionist, you must define to us, what you percieve "GOD's WORD" to be, brother Trying...  :dontknow:

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

willieH: Hi brother Trying... :hithere:

I mean this reply to be non-combative, and in loving respect, but I believe you are still being unclear as to WHAT you determine and to BE, and USE as GOD's WORD...

The Bible clearly tells us that CHRIST is "God's Word" ..... 

So are you saying you believe the BIBLE?

What is CHRIST to you?  And HOW do you determine what HIS WORDS are, brother T?

Are you saying that anything IN the BIBLE which is not a "quotation" of CHRIST's SPOKEN WORDS... is NOT His WORD?  :JCThink:  (i.e. the letters, the torah, the prophets, etc.)

pEace...
...willieH  :cloud9:

I believe "the bible" is a collection of historical documentation written by men inspired by God to keep account of happenings... I highly doubt each author knew at the time they penned it that they were writing "the bible"...

We now use the bible as our "playbook" and "rule book" much in the fashion a Football team has a playbook and on-field referee's to help make sure they play by the rules...

[Paul Hazelwood]

So you're putting science above God's word on what happened? Hmm........

Here's a good article which may help you out:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

ok, then explain why you accuse someone of putting science above Gods word while posting a link to a scientific article at AIG?

Because the person brought up the issue of Star light as in "how can we distant star light if the Universe is young?"  That's what Science teaches the Bible clearly states the world and universe was created in 6-days..

I listed the AIG link as I find their hypothesis to be very well thought out one that sounds plausable...

The bible is not as clear as it is made out to be on the subject.   Science is merely the interpretation of data.

Explain why the 6 day account in scripture must be 6 - 24 hour days as we measure time?

First off, it's qualified by the terms "day and night"....

Secondly.. it's the same word in the hebrew "yom'.... as used in Noah's account... and other places in the OT...

Did noah float around for 40 days and nights or was it 40 years? If we're going to call that period 24hours days.. then we must do the same in Genesis 1...

ok, now, explain where scripture explains how it was done in correlation with scientific data.

[trying]

ok, now, explain where scripture explains how it was done in correlation with scientific data.

You're assuming scientific data is 100% correct, aren't you?

AIG has a ton of great resources which deal with the age of the Earth as do other creation-related ministries....

[Paul Hazelwood]

ok, now, explain where scripture explains how it was done in correlation with scientific data.

You're assuming scientific data is 100% correct, aren't you?

AIG has a ton of great resources which deal with the age of the Earth as do other creation-related ministries....

Alright, but you didn't answer the question.   You point out a resource that claims to use scientific data while saying to me that I might assume that scientific data is 100% correct?

You might need to clarify your position.