The universe

[saved]

well the earth has been around for what billions of years? and we know dinosuars were here way before man was...so something does not add up in those 6 days or 6,000 years.

Just remember people use to believe the earth was flat/

i believe in science anyday over a book that was written 2,000 years ago when they did not have science like we do with all our modern technology.

Not so. The earth has only been around as long as creation which is about 6000 years old. The dinos lived during the time of men. Many died in the flood that came aftewr the creation. Here is a link to a site that offers some good information on the truth about this. You can listen here]http://www.drdino.com/Downloads/Seminar/vids/index.jsp[/url]

or watch here;
http://www.drdino.com/Downloads/Seminar/vids/index.jsp

Both are non copy righted and offered free to anyone.

[MadDoctor]

The earth has only been around as long as creation which is about 6000 years.

[politely] you really believe that? [/politely]

[Rivas]

Not so. The earth has only been around as long as creation which is about 6000 years old.

dude you need some serious help

[brembo]

So...uh all the nifty ice cores and carbon dating processes are all bunk? JUST because a book written in times when science was non-existant says so?

I'll stick with cold hard science when trying to get a fix on the earths age. Faith will allow me to reconcile the differences in science and what's in the bible.

[YARDofSTUF]

Actuallt that would be incorrect. The creation time line is only a six day period and if one wanted to claim that the days are years there was only six mentioned in the creation. The 7th was not a creation day. Even if one were to hold the view that there was 6 thousand years of creation instead of a literal 6 day creation it would mean nothing in the scheme of things when debating the timeline claimed by some as billions of years. However the text is clear in that it means literal days.

Its ok, you're forgiven.

[saved]

So...uh all the nifty ice cores and carbon dating processes are all bunk? JUST because a book written in times when science was non-existant says so?

I'll stick with cold hard science when trying to get a fix on the earths age. Faith will allow me to reconcile the differences in science and what's in the bible.

Carbon dating is a fraud. There is no science that shows an old earth. There is however sceince that shows a young earth. If you listen to the link you will hear about it. And yes I do believe this without a doubt.

[saved]

Its ok, you're forgiven.

Yes I know and so can anyone who will repent and believe.

[Ghosthunter]

Carbon dating is a fraud. There is no science that shows an old earth. There is however sceince that shows a young earth. If you listen to the link you will hear about it. And yes I do believe this without a doubt.

are you a scientist? While carbon dating might not be 100% accurate all the time, it is still very precise within a few years. So when we talking a few billion...and maybe off by a few years or so as far as the bible goes it doesnt make a difference.

If you really want to understand Carbon Dating take a look at it from a scientist point of view here:

http://www.c14dating.com/agecalc.html

Accuracy and Precision in Radiocarbon dating
It is important to note the meaning of "accuracy" and "precision" in radiocarbon dating. Accuracy refers to the date being a 'true' estimate of the age of a sample within the range of the statistical limits or ± value of the date. Thus, for the sake of argument, if we were radiocarbon dating a sample of Harold 1's (d. 1066) remains, and obtained a date of 1040±40 AD, we would have dated the event of his death accurately. If however the date were 1000±15 AD, we would be inaccurate. In terms of precision, however, the former is imprecise in comparison to the latter. It can be seen that the date of 1000±15 AD while being highly precise is, in this instance, inaccurate.

[brembo]

Okay then, explain away ice cores. Explain away doppler effect(red shift) on moving objects in space, that given the estimated size of the universe would have required way more time than 6000/7000 years to reach that distance. Explain why we don't find any remains(fossils) of people with the dinosaurs fossils.

[Ghosthunter]

Well I actually I made a mistake....To be perfectly honest I am not a earth scientist so i get my terminology mixed up. From what I understsand after doing some more reading, carbon dating can only be used up until past 50,000 years.

So from that alone, we know the earth is at least 50,000 years.

But what they do use is something called rediometric metering. Now scientists admit there is no exact date of earth but they do know the earth is at least 4.3 billion years old:

The ages of Earth and Moon rocks and of meteorites are measured by the decay of long-lived radioactive isotopes of elements that occur naturally in rocks and minerals and that decay with half lives of 700 million to more than 100 billion years to stable isotopes of other elements. These dating techniques, which are firmly grounded in physics and are known collectively as radiometric dating, are used to measure the last time that the rock being dated was either melted or disturbed sufficiently to rehomogenize its radioactive elements.


243K
Click on the image to see a graphical representation of geologic time


Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age are found on all of Earth's continents. The oldest rocks on Earth found so far are the Acasta Gneisses in northwestern Canada near Great Slave Lake (4.03 Ga) and the Isua Supracrustal rocks in West Greenland (3.7 to 3.8 Ga), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in the Minnesota River Valley and northern Michigan (3.5-3.7 billion years), in Swaziland (3.4-3.5 billion years), and in Western Australia (3.4-3.6 billion years). [See Editor's Note.] These ancient rocks have been dated by a number of radiometric dating methods and the consistency of the results give scientists confidence that the ages are correct to within a few percent. An interesting feature of these ancient rocks is that they are not from any sort of "primordial crust" but are lava flows and sediments deposited in shallow water, an indication that Earth history began well before these rocks were deposited. In Western Australia, single zircon crystals found in younger sedimentary rocks have radiometric ages of as much as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials to be found on Earth so far. The source rocks for these zircon crystals have not yet been found. The ages measured for Earth's oldest rocks and oldest crystals show that the Earth is at least 4.3 billion years in age but do not reveal the exact age of Earth's formation.

The best age for the Earth (4.54 Ga) is based on old, presumed single-stage leads coupled with the Pb ratios in troilite from iron meteorites, specifically the Canyon Diablo meteorite. In addition, mineral grains (zircon) with U-Pb ages of 4.4 Ga have recently been reported from sedimentary rocks in west-central Australia.

and here you can read how radiometric dating works:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html



Back to the original point..there is no way the earth is only 6,000 years old..that we do know for a fact based upon carbon dating alone and now add radiometric and we know at least 4.3 billion years..which the bible does not account for.

[stevebakh]

The Creator has always been. he is self existing and has no beginning. The universe cannot be eternal since any such idea would violate the second law of thermal dynamics. And yes it is far fetched to believe thta everything came from nothing and then evolved.

How did I know you wouldn't be able to apply said logic to your own beliefs?

I think that the idea of an eternal being who has no beginning and no end, who created the earth and every creature on the planet in 6 (earth) days, is more propostruous and unbelievable.

Okay, here's another question for you. God created us, then why all the many different religions and beliefs? Why so many different sects of the christian religion alone? Why so many different gods over the years. And the important one here: How is your god any more credible than accepted mythalogical gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?


Oh and most new-earther "science" can be refuted and dis-proven.

[Rivas]

How did I know you wouldn't be able to apply said logic to your own beliefs?

I think that the idea of an eternal being who has no beginning and no end, who created the earth and every creature on the planet in 6 (earth) days, is more propostruous and unbelievable.

Okay, here's another question for you. God created us, then why all the many different religions and beliefs? Why so many different sects of the christian religion alone? Why so many different gods over the years. And the important one here: How is your god any more credible than accepted mythalogical gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?

very good questions

[MadDoctor]

Carbon dating is a fraud. There is no science that shows an old earth.

[respectfully] How old are you? I see in your profile that you are a machinist. I’m assuming that you were a non-believer for X number of years and then (a year or two ago?) you were "reborn”... and now you are redefining what was taught to you in high school biology/history/physics/geology classes? Am I right? [/respectfully]

[YARDofSTUF]

Saved, do u go to confession?

[Bouncer]

Actually, you are wrong. It is technically possible. When you look at the molecular level, we're made more of space than we are of matter. There are gabs between each atom and the space around each one by which electrons orbit the nucleus. In fact, I believe that neutrinos can pass straight through solid matter, even passing straight through our planet. This is basic chemistry.

Actually, you're wrong, and any physicist will tell you so. You're ignoring gravity and the electrical charge which binds these atoms. If the two objects did move through one another at the atomic level the position of the atoms would be changed by this interaction. That would then change the type of molecules those atoms were building and quite possibly their electrical charge as electrons were stripped awy from some atoms and fell into the orbits of others. The substances themselves would be changed at the atomic level. All of this would create energy, which would be released. Like lightning hitting a tree and creating ash as a by product of the energy release.

However, the ability to change the atomic structure of a molecue does not mean that those molecules can then be formed into a complex piece of machinery at random.

It would take as much a leap of faith to believe they can as to believe in God. It is as likely that a lightning bolt would hit some rocks and ore and turn it into a watch. You can believe that it is possible only in the same way you can believe it's possible God breathed and created the universe.

Both are unprovable by any means we currently know of.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

[Bouncer]

Okay, here's another question for you. God created us, then why all the many different religions and beliefs? Why so many different sects of the christian religion alone? Why so many different gods over the years. And the important one here: How is your god any more credible than accepted mythalogical gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?

That one's easy. (granted the question wasn't for me, but still).. How come a diamond can look different when you look at individual facets of it? God may simply be larger than our capacity to understand.

Consider: If God did create the universe, and it's fair to say we don't understand that creation very well (We're still arguing over some of the BASIC concepts, much less the more advanced ones), then how can we then say we understand God? It's like a 4 year old trying to understand an airplane or how the polar icecaps were formed. This doesn't mean we don't stop trying, but we are imperfect creatures, and therfore would be incapable of completely understanding a perfect being. At best we could gian some limited understanding of some of the facets. Just as looking at one part of a diamond does not represent the whole.

There is a Koan that illustrates this more concisely. "The mind is like a dog. His master points at the moon, but he barks at the hand."

Regards,
-Bouncer-

[SRF01]

Both are unprovable by any means we currently know of.
Regards,
-Bouncer-

Very true, but i've gotta stick with Stephen Hawking's view on that one.

[Bouncer]

Very true, but i've gotta stick with Stephen Hawking's view on that one.

I understand. I'm not advocating one position, but rather simply pointing out that neither side does their "cause" (if you will) any good by wearing blinders. Science without morality is science without ethics. And that's where Doctors like Mengele and Fritz Klein come in. Human experimentation, as an example of Science run amok, neither started with the Nazis nor ended with them.

We should be mindful of that. Of making science a God where the "unbelievers" are heretics and cast out or dehumanized as "not smart enough".

Regards,
-Bouncer-

[stevebakh]

Actually, you're wrong, and any physicist will tell you so. You're ignoring gravity and the electrical charge which binds these atoms.

Gravity aside (no mention of where this could be taking place) if all the atoms were lined up and equally, the electrons orbiting the nuclei were aligned, couldn't it be technically possible? Either way, the person who brought up the point probably didn't mean it was likely, but still technically possible, regardless of the odds.

If I'm still wrong (highly possible) then I stand corrected.

----

I understand your answer in regards to looking at god from different angles etc, but that may only explain the different sects of christianity. Maybe each has a different take on the idea of god, or interprets the texts differently - but what about different religions with different beliefs? They can't all be right.

But the main question I would like answered by Saved, is again, this one:

How is your god any more credible than accepted mythalogical gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?

[saved]

are you a scientist? While carbon dating might not be 100% accurate all the time, it is still very precise within a few years. So when we talking a few billion...and maybe off by a few years or so as far as the bible goes it doesnt make a difference.

If you really want to understand Carbon Dating take a look at it from a scientist point of view here:

http://www.c14dating.com/agecalc.html

Many people are under the false impression that carbon dating proves that dinosaurs and other extinct animals lived millions of years ago. What many do not realize is that carbon dating is not used to date dinosaurs.

The reason? Carbon dating is only accurate back a few thousand years. So if scientists believe that a creature lived millions of years ago, then they would need to date it another way.

But there is the problem. They assume dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. They ignore evidence that does not fit their preconcieved notion.

What would happen if a dinosaur bone were carbon dated? - At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Scientists dated dinosaur bones using the Carbon dating method. The age they came back with was only a few thousand years old.

This date did not fit the preconceived notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. So what did they do? They threw the results out. And kept their theory that dinosaurs lived "millions of years ago" instead.

This is common practice.

They then use potassium argon, or other methods, and date the fossils again.

They do this many times, using a different dating method each time. The results can be as much as 150 million years different from each other! - how’s that for an "exact" science?

They then pick the date they like best, based upon their preconceived notion of how old their theory says the fossil should be (based upon the Geologic column).

So they start with the assumption that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then manipulate the results until they agree with their conclusion.

Their assumptions dictate their conclusions.

So why is it that if the date doesn't fit the theory, they change the facts?

Unbiased science changes the theory to support the facts. They should not change the facts to fit the theory.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... dating.asp
Yes take a look at the truth about this.

[saved]

Okay then, explain away ice cores. Explain away doppler effect(red shift) on moving objects in space, that given the estimated size of the universe would have required way more time than 6000/7000 years to reach that distance. Explain why we don't find any remains(fossils) of people with the dinosaurs fossils.

actually it is not explained away, but explained. This all happened in 6 literal days by the Creator. Some of what we see is now the results of the fall and the flood.

[saved]

How did I know you wouldn't be able to apply said logic to your own beliefs?

I think that the idea of an eternal being who has no beginning and no end, who created the earth and every creature on the planet in 6 (earth) days, is more propostruous and unbelievable.

Okay, here's another question for you. God created us, then why all the many different religions and beliefs? Why so many different sects of the christian religion alone? Why so many different gods over the years. And the important one here: How is your god any more credible than accepted mythalogical gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?


Oh and most new-earther "science" can be refuted and dis-proven.

stevebakh,
those are great questions. So lets get some answers.

Question;
God created us, then why all the many different religions and beliefs?

Answer:
Men are rebellious and do not want the God of creation to rule over him, but man is also a religious being by design. So instead of seeking the true God he worships his self made gods. The God of the bible does not force man to follow Him. He allows him to choose. He does plead with Him and use many ways to get him to turn himself over to The only real God but in the end man has the final say as to his eternal estate and God honors it.

Question;
Why so many different sects of the Christian religion alone?

Answer:
It depends on what you mean by the term "sect". The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says this;
Pronunciation: 'sekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English secte, from Middle French & Late Latin & Latin; Middle French, group, sect, from Late Latin secta organized ecclesiastical body, from Latin, course of action, way of life, probably from sectari to pursue, frequentative of sequi to follow -- more at SUE
1 a : a dissenting or schismatic religious body; especially : one regarded as extreme or heretical b : a religious denomination
2 archaic : SEX 1 <so is all her sect -- Shakespeare>
3 a : a group adhering to a distinctive doctrine or to a leader b :

If you mean 1a then the reason is that Satan is also involved in trying to disrupt the desires of God. While he has no ability to change God's plans and overcome God's church he can do things that sway many people like yourself to question the truth of the bible and he does so by causing what seems as different Christian beliefs on the same thing. The truth is however that all Christians hold the same fundamental truths. There are just not as many real Christians as is being claimed.

However if by "sects you mean denominations then it is a little different. All Christian denominations hold the same fundamental truths. They preach that there is God the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. That men are sinners fallen from God and need to be redeemed and that redemption comes through one Person the Lord Jesus Christ at repentance towards God and faith in His Son. There are some other doctrinal beliefs that differ, but they have no bearing on men's eternal relationship with God. The differences are because not all people in the church are really Christians and not all are being led by the Spirit.

Question;
Why so many different gods over the years.

Answer:
As stated above Satan seeks to confuse truth. Also men have a void and need for some sort of relationship with their Creator, but they also hold a rebellious heart that pushes them away from Him so to appease the need they create gods of their own making. Even those who say that they are atheists have a god that they worship. it is themselves. They may not call it god but they treat it like a god.

Question;
And the important one here: How is your god any more credible than accepted mythological gods of the past are? How is your god any more credible than Zeus?

The main reason is that He is real. However that statement in itself for an unbeliever is of little consequence so let me explain.
He has given man a clear account of Himself in the bible. When studied with an open mind and even by those who have had closed minds it becomes clear that what he has given man and kept throughout the ages is true. The bible is the most scrutinized book in all the world. It has been burned, banned, confused, and even sought out to prove it to be invalid and yet it still remains and has been proven accurate rather then inaccurate. The prophesies alone validate its accuracy. The testimonies and changed lives of those who surrender to Him in faith also validates it truth. As for Zeus he was a mythological creation of men. He is claimed the "father of gods and men" as Homer calls him, has many mythological tales. There is no personal relationship to false gods unlike the God of creation who opens Himself to us and allows us to fellowship with Him through His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. He offers Himself to anyone who will come and gives them the peace and hope that we really seek in this life and the life to come.

[stevebakh]

As for Zeus he was a mythological creation of men.

And many (including myself) believe the christian concept of god is pretty much the same thing. I'm sure the followers of Zeus believed as strongly in his existance than you do in your god.

There is no evidence which proves that the christian concept of god is any more valid or credible than any other god that's existed throughout our time. The only difference is that Zeus is now accepted to be mythology. The same will one day be said of Christianity.

[saved]

[respectfully] How old are you? I see in your profile that you are a machinist. I’m assuming that you were a non-believer for X number of years and then (a year or two ago?) you were "reborn”... and now you are redefining what was taught to you in high school biology/history/physics/geology classes? Am I right? [/respectfully]

Actually everyone is born a non believer. As to redefining what I was taught in high school the answer is yes and no. I have been shown the truth of some of what I was taught in high school as being wrong. It is no different then when we are taught something in biology about a certain claimed truth and years later the scientist correct their error because they find the truth. At one time men believed the moon would not support the weight of a man or craft, but we all know that is wrong. Today we know that carbon dating does not work without all the history behind the thing being dated and that it can only go back a few thousand years, not millions or billions.. As to how long I have been saved;

I lived most of 30 plus years as a person who did what I wanted. My sins grew so bad that I could not stand myself yet I could not escape my ways. When I say I had sin, I mean I had sin! Much too serious to even mention openly. I began to read an old bible that had been passed down to me, but could not understand it. Also at about that same time one evening I was watching a TV program called "That increditable" and the entire program was dedicated to people who has some sort of experience with God. By the way I was an agnostic. The program caused me to think more serious about if there was a God. However I still was not sure.

Because of the seriousness of my sin I began to call out to Him. Not really to get saved, because I knew nothing of this, but because I wanted peace from my ways. I really did not consider wanting to surrender to Him. Well He did nothing. I am not sure exactly what I expected, but nothing changed. I called to Him several times, but nothing. Finally I just gave up and decided that there is no God or I had went too far. You see I knew my sins and could remember the time of raising my fist to heaven and curing Him with every foul name I could think of. So I just gave up on God and forgot about Him remaining an agnostic.
However He had not given up on me. Praise His name! After several months of forgetting about even calling on Him He began to work in my life. One night after going to bed I was awaken (some call it a dream) and taken to a place where all I could see was a pearly white cloud like light. I was moved along for a short time and suddenly brought to a stopping place. I then heard the sound of a trumpet and I was spoken to with these words. "It is Jesus Christ." I then looked straight ahead and I could see Him standing as if it were across an eternal expanse. He stood there for a second and then suddenly came and stood before me. As He stood there He never spoke to me, but His face said more then words ever could. He was heart broken over me. His face was absolutely broken over where my sin had taken me. Actually more then broken He was bewildered. The love and compassion I saw is more then can be explained.
Then the look on His face began to change and I could feel His eyes piercing my heart and I knew he could see my sinfulness. His eyes became like black burning coals piercing me. His entire countenance became one of judgment and anger. Actually more then just anger. He was enraged at me over my sin. Then suddenly it was over and I lay awake in my bed in a cold sweat hardly able to believe what had just happened to me. Then after laying there a few minutes He spoke to me and said these words. "You are about to lose more then you know."
Well I was no longer an agnostic, but even though I now believed and even knew that He was I was not a believer in the biblical sense. Now I had to wrestle with do I want Him in my life. The truth is I did not. However I knew I needed Him and if I did not turn to Him I would split hell wide open. So I called out to Him again, but this time with a purpose. I asked Him to give me the time I needed to say yes to Him. He was very gracious with me. Never forcing, never dealing harshly, but daily in a gentle way calling me to Himself letting me decide the outcome.
After several months I finally decided that it was time to get right with Him and found a little church where I sat and told my story to the pastor and I asked the Lord if He would accept a sinner such as I. He did and now I am a true believer. For over twenty years now He has been faithfully chipping away at this unworthy one, changing the way I live and think. Daily moment by moment leading and guiding and many times having to dust me off from some foolish action I have done, only to confirm that I am His and nothing can snatch me from Him. So do I believe? Without a doubt, but believing is not just thinking it to be or hoping it to be. It is surrendering to follow that which is true and yes Jesus Christ is The way, The Truth, and The life.

The question is not have others been as bad a sinner as I, but have they sinned at all. It is not the depth of the sin nor the amount of sin that condemns us. It is the fact that we do not want to have God rule over our lives in every manner and deed as He should. We do not want to have a Master who tells us we can or cannot do such and such and we willingly humble ourselves and bow to him. This alone is what sends us to hell. our sins are nothing but a witness as to who we are serving or should I say not serving. That is why once we are truly saved we cannot continue to live in sin. Never again will a true believer practice sin in their life. Yes we may struggle with certain sins, but we are doing just that. Fighting the battle against them and seeking to not fall to them. Not because we are saved by how we live, but because we live to glorify a living Savior who has already saved us who have come to Him and He will never cast us out. It is a life and battle of joy and peace. Yes there can be sorrow and even defeat for a moment in that walk, but there is an overwhelming joy of knowing that one day we who have surrendered our lives and hearts will be in heaven with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for He alone is the One who saves, not we ourselves. Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Not everyone will have the experience that I had, but everyone does have to come to the same point. Broken over their sin, ready and wanting to get right with God no matter what it may cost them. He will do the rest.The choice is for each to make. I have made mine and I believe.

[saved]

And many (including myself) believe the christian concept of god is pretty much the same thing. I'm sure the followers of Zeus believed as strongly in his existance than you do in your god.

There is no evidence which proves that the christian concept of god is any more valid or credible than any other god that's existed throughout our time. The only difference is that Zeus is now accepted to be mythology. The same will one day be said of Christianity.

There ia a great deal of difference. The God of the bible has been around since the creation. Zeus came about and died out. God has always been and is still here. paople never had a relationship with Xeus, mulittudes have had one with the God of the bible. Zues was a man made belief, the God of the bible is a self sustaining reality.

[saved]

That one's easy. (granted the question wasn't for me, but still).. How come a diamond can look different when you look at individual facets of it? God may simply be larger than our capacity to understand.

Consider: If God did create the universe, and it's fair to say we don't understand that creation very well (We're still arguing over some of the BASIC concepts, much less the more advanced ones), then how can we then say we understand God? It's like a 4 year old trying to understand an airplane or how the polar icecaps were formed. This doesn't mean we don't stop trying, but we are imperfect creatures, and therfore would be incapable of completely understanding a perfect being. At best we could gian some limited understanding of some of the facets. Just as looking at one part of a diamond does not represent the whole.

There is a Koan that illustrates this more concisely. "The mind is like a dog. His master points at the moon, but he barks at the hand."

Regards,
-Bouncer-

It is correct to suggest that God cannot be understood in His totality, but not correct to suggest that there can be no understanding. He alone can explain Himself. We have no ability to find Him out on our own. We can neither go up to heaven and learn of Him nor seek His attributes in some scientific experiment. He has declared Himself to men in His word. That alone is the account we have of Him. We either believe it or we do not. That is not to say that we believe it without evidence. The evidence lies within its own revelation. Every prophesy has been or is being fulfilled as stated. No other book on a so called god can make that claim. All the other writings of men on their man made gods show just how false they are in time while the God of the bible continues to prove Himself. It is not the man cannot believe what it says, but that they choose not to believe out of rebellion. The very fact the Jew has returned to their land at least in part should be evidence enough. Before the 1900's the skeptics howled at the fact that Israel would never again be and now they are dead and dead wrong the skeptics have to find other things to hang their false hopes on, but they too will one day be proved wrong.

For to accept what it says and still not turn to Him leaves the person in this life a miserable human being since they know that they will one day face Him and find nothing but eternal torment to supplant their temporal torment that they lived here.

So while we will never know all about God because we are finite and He is infinite we can know enough about Him to have a personal relationship with Him and the knowledge of eternal life to come.

[Ghosthunter]

Many people are under the false impression that carbon dating proves that dinosaurs and other extinct animals lived millions of years ago. What many do not realize is that carbon dating is not used to date dinosaurs.

The reason? Carbon dating is only accurate back a few thousand years. So if scientists believe that a creature lived millions of years ago, then they would need to date it another way.

But there is the problem. They assume dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. They ignore evidence that does not fit their preconcieved notion.

What would happen if a dinosaur bone were carbon dated? - At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Scientists dated dinosaur bones using the Carbon dating method. The age they came back with was only a few thousand years old.

This date did not fit the preconceived notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. So what did they do? They threw the results out. And kept their theory that dinosaurs lived "millions of years ago" instead.

This is common practice.

They then use potassium argon, or other methods, and date the fossils again.

They do this many times, using a different dating method each time. The results can be as much as 150 million years different from each other! - how’s that for an "exact" science?

They then pick the date they like best, based upon their preconceived notion of how old their theory says the fossil should be (based upon the Geologic column).

So they start with the assumption that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then manipulate the results until they agree with their conclusion.

Their assumptions dictate their conclusions.

So why is it that if the date doesn't fit the theory, they change the facts?

Unbiased science changes the theory to support the facts. They should not change the facts to fit the theory.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs200 ... dating.asp
Yes take a look at the truth about this.

I think it is other way around..i think many religious people are trying to throw out science to fit the bible.

Radiometric dating is very accurate, and we do know the earth is at least 4.5 billion years old.


Here is a good article if you will read it:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

and this shows flaws in many argument on those who beleive earth is not very old:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/age.htm


This is all based on science, not made up facts or emotion. I tend to beleive the same science that has led us to some amazing technology.

[saved]

I think it is other way around..i think many religious people are trying to throw out science to fit the bible.

Radiometric dating is very accurate, and we do know the earth is at least 4.5 billion years old.


Here is a good article if you will read it:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

and this shows flaws in many argument on those who beleive earth is not very old:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/age.htm


This is all based on science, not made up facts or emotion. I tend to beleive the same science that has led us to some amazing technology.

Actually it is not accurate. The bible is full of science and has proven science many times. Here is an article to show its false readings.]http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-113.htm[/url]

http://www.icr.org/research/as/potassimargondating.html

MYTHS REGARDING RADIOCARBON DATING
http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-189.htm

[Ghosthunter]

Actually it is not accurate. The bible is full of science and has proven science many times. Here is an article to show its false readings.]http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-113.htm[/url]

http://www.icr.org/research/as/potassimargondating.html

MYTHS REGARDING RADIOCARBON DATING
http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-189.htm

Those links are all christian based, too much bias

I understand why Christians are so desperate to do anything to proove that the earth is not very old. If genesis turns out to be inaccurate what does that say about the rest of the bible?


So my answer to that is most of the stories in the bible are myths. That does not mean the bible cannot be used as a tool, but I dont beleive in taking the bible literally.

For example genesis was a myth that was told origianlly by Babylonian back around 2,000 BC, when they discovered some works and realized it is very similar to genesis.


There are many other examples of other stories in the bible, that were myths taken from previous ancient cultures.

[saved]

Those links are all christian based, too much bias

I understand why Christians are so desperate to do anything to proove that the earth is not very old. If genesis turns out to be inaccurate what does that say about the rest of the bible?


So my answer to that is most of the stories in the bible are myths. That does not mean the bible cannot be used as a tool, but I dont beleive in taking the bible literally.

For example genesis was a myth that was told origianlly by Babylonian back around 2,000 BC, when they discovered some works and realized it is very similar to genesis.


There are many other examples of other stories in the bible, that were myths taken from previous ancient cultures.

Thoise links are scientific based from Christian men and women. They are also provable which makes them correct. Any person can take the stand that the bible is a book of myths if they choose, but they have to do the same thing as they do when they believe in carbon dating being accurate for millions of years. Reject the truth. You mentioned the babylonion teachings 2000 years ago. The bible is over 4000 thoushand years old. Also you might want to give some documentation on what you said instead of just making a clkaim that is not true.

[stevebakh]

There ia a great deal of difference. The God of the bible has been around since the creation. Zeus came about and died out. God has always been and is still here. paople never had a relationship with Xeus, mulittudes have had one with the God of the bible. Zues was a man made belief, the God of the bible is a self sustaining reality.

That's what I'm talking about... to many others and myself, god (at least the christian concept) is nothing more than a man made belief. Those same people don't believe god has been around since creation. So you see, as much as you think Zeus and co. are merely man-made beliefs, there are others who think equally the same about christianity and god.

Now do you understand why this argument could go on forever, why your beliefs are no more valid than ancient greek mythology? Because I doubt yours as much as you doubt others.

[saved]

That's what I'm talking about... to many others and myself, god (at least the christian concept) is nothing more than a man made belief. Those same people don't believe god has been around since creation. So you see, as much as you think Zeus and co. are merely man-made beliefs, there are others who think equally the same about christianity and god.

Now do you understand why this argument could go on forever, why your beliefs are no more valid than ancient greek mythology? Because I doubt yours as much as you doubt others.

The difference is thta the God of the bible has proven Himself and the false god of zeus has been proven by time.

[Ghosthunter]

Thoise links are scientific based from Christian men and women. They are also provable which makes them correct. Any person can take the stand that the bible is a book of myths if they choose, but they have to do the same thing as they do when they believe in carbon dating being accurate for millions of years. Reject the truth. You mentioned the babylonion teachings 2000 years ago. The bible is over 4000 thoushand years old. Also you might want to give some documentation on what you said instead of just making a clkaim that is not true.

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/babylonian.html

here is one link that I found, there are many books out there if you so choose to do the research yourself:

The Babylonian Origins of the Creation Myths
We have shown that the creation stories in Genesis are just myths. The next question one may ask is: where did these stories come from?
The Origins of the Creation Accounts
The Origins of the Garden of Eden

The Origins of the Creation Account
For many centuries, both Christian and Jewish theologians believe that the stories were given by God and thus owed their origins purely to divine inspiration. However in the nineteenth century, British archaeologists unearthed seven tablets containing the Babylonian [a] myth of creation known as Enuma Elish. Like the famous Epic of Gilgamesh, archaeologists have assigned the date of composition of this work to around 2000 BC. Although the story differs in specifics to that told in Genesis, the similarities in the general tone has convinced archaeologists that the Genesis account had been fundamentally derived from the Babylonian one. Some of the similarities include:

The reference to the initial state as being a disordered chaos of water.
Genesis 1:1 refers to the “darkness” upon the face of the deep. In the Babylonian myth, in the beginning there was only Apsu, the sweet water ocean and Tiamat, the salt water ocean. In fact, archaeologists have generally acknowledged that the Hebrew word for the chaos of the waters or “the deep”, tehom, is actually derived from the Akkadian Tiamat.

The creation of a firmament to separate the waters above from the waters below.
In Genesis 1:6-8 God is said to have created the firmament on the second day of creation. In the Babylonian myth, Marduk, son of the Ea the god of wisdom, killed Tiamat and split her into two. The upper half of Tiamat was fixed onto the sky to keep the waters above in place.

The sequence of successive acts of creation.
In the Babylonian myth, after Tiamat was killed, the firmament was created by Marduk to separate the waters above from below. Then he created the sun, the moon, the planets and the stars. Finally man was created. This order is very closely paralleled in Genesis I where the firmament was created on the second day, the sun, moon and stars on the third day and man on the sixth day. [1]
It thus cannot be denied that the creation myth from Genesis must have been derived from the Babylonian one. To quote the late Professor S.H. Hooke (1874-1968) an expert on Old Testament Studies:

n spite of the complete transformation of the Babylonian material effected by the priestly writer, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the original form of the creation story upon which he is depending is ultimately of Babylonian origin. [2]


Back to the top

The Origins of the Garden of Eden
The garden of Eden and the story of Adam and Eve is also derived from older Sumerian and Akkadian myths. [c] It is important to recall the story of Adam and Eve from the second and third chapters of Genesis in order to compare this with the Sumerian version.
Genesis 2:4-9] We will now follow Hooke’s paraphrasing of the Sumerian paradise myth;

According to Sumerian myth the only thing Dilmun lacked was fresh water; the god Enki (or Ea) ordered Utu, the sun-god, to bring up fresh water from the earth to water the garden.
...
In the myth of Enki and Ninhursag it is related that the mother-goddess Ninhursag caused eight plants to grow in the garden of the gods. Enki desired to eat these plants and sent his messenger Isimud to fetch them. Enki ate them one by one, and Ninhursag in her rage pronounced the curse of death upon Enki. As the result of the curse eight of Enki’s bodily organs were attacked by disease and he was at the pain of death. The great gods were in dismay and Enlil [the chief god] was powerless to help. Ninhursag was induced to return and deal with the situation. She created eight goddesses of healing who proceeded to heal each of the diseased parts of Enki’s body. One of these parts was the god’s rib, and the goddess who was created to deal with the rib was named Ninti, which means “lady of the rib”. [4]


The similarity betwen the above myth and that of Genesis’ is obvious to see. The similarity include:


The setting- a garden in paradise.
The watering of the gardens with water from the earth.
The consumption of forbidden fruits, by Adam and Eve in Genesis and by the god Enki in the Sumerian myth.
The curse upon the person (s) who ate the fruit.
The creating of a female from the rib of the male in Genesis and the creating of a female to heal the rib of the male in the Sumerian precursor.
The name of the female thus created. In Genesis, Eve, or in its original semitic form Hawah, means life. In the Sumerian myth, the word ti from the name Ninti has a double meaning; it could mean either ‘rib’ or ‘life’. Thus Ninti can be rendered as “lady of the rib” or “lady of life”. [5]
That is not all, the Babylonian myth, the Epic of Gilgamesh also contains an episode that doubtless also influenced the writers of Genesis. In it Gilgamesh, in his quest for immortality, was told by Utnapishtim (the Babylonian “Noah”) that there exists a plant at the bottom of the sea that has the property of making the old young again. Gilgamesh dived into the sea and brought up the plant. However the plant was stolen while he was taking bath. The thief who stole the plant of everlasting youth away from him was none other than the serpent! [6]


That Babylonian myths should influence the stories in the Bible is really not surprising. The Babylonian empires were influential throughout the whole middle eastern region for over three thousand years. The history of Jews is also very closely tied to Babylon. For it was there that the Jews were taken into exile in the year 587 BC.

[stevebakh]

The difference is thta the God of the bible has proven Himself and the false god of zeus has been proven by time.

I don't understand why you find my argument so hard to understand. Point is... I don't believe god has proven itself. I don't believe it exists. Period. So this is why I think your beliefs in god / christianity hold no weight.

Just out of curiosity - do you believe that Hinduism (the religion) is satans work?

[saved]

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/babylonian.html

here is one link that I found, there are many books out there if you so choose to do the research yourself:

Ghosthunter,
you don't get it. The Gen account was written before the babylonian empire. The babylonian empire took some of what the bible teaches and used it in their culture. The bible is accurate and the babylonian teahings thta contradict are false.

[saved]

I don't understand why you find my argument so hard to understand. Point is... I don't believe god has proven itself. I don't believe it exists. Period. So this is why I think your beliefs in god / christianity hold no weight.

Just out of curiosity - do you believe that Hinduism (the religion) is satans work?

Like I said anyone can choose toi reject the truth. I know ofd people who do not believe that we ever went to the moon, but the proof is evident. The proof of the bible far outstrips any moon landing. It is a choice to believe the evidence or reject it. Each does so depending on their own person choice, but each will receive their reward.

[Ghosthunter]

Ghosthunter,
you don't get it. The Gen account was written before the babylonian empire. The babylonian empire took some of what the bible teaches and used it in their culture. The bible is accurate and the babylonian teahings thta contradict are false.

What?

You got me confused..i thought the original 5 books were written by Moses, thourgh the word of God? That was what I was tuaght in hebrew school if I so remember

Moses was supposedly living around 1400 B.C. approx what they think?

So which came first?


EDIT: here is a link from a bible page that even shows this

http://www.biblepath.com/bible.html

[saved]

What?

You got me confused..i thought the original 5 books were written by Moses, thourgh the word of God? That was what I was tuaght in hebrew school if I so remember

Moses was supposedly living around 1400 B.C. approx what they think?

So which came first?

I should have said that the account of the writing is giving witness before the Babylonian Empire. The writer is writing about events that God gave before any empire was around. There is some difficulty from authorities as to when exactly the Babylonian Empire started. Some do refer to An Old Babylonian period before Moses. I was refering to the time of when the empire was at its height. Actually it has never died totally. However that being said the accounts of the flood and the creation would certainly be passed down from generation to generation and any group or religion would pick up on the truth. As you mentioned God did give the account to Moses and God did not give him an account based on false teachings.

[MadDoctor]

Saved... Thanks for the background info.

[saved]

For those who disbeleive the creation account here are some prophecies
that has been filled which validate its accuracy.

http://100prophecies.org/prophecy.htm