(07-28-2014 08:03 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 07:51 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 03:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

But who needs that when you have a 2000 year old excerpt that says otherwise?

You shouldn't discount the possibility that God tweaked a few genes 6000 years back that made us into something different from what we were before that time.

Here's a tweak:

(07-28-2014 10:20 AM)miko33 Wrote:  The 6000 - 7000 year estimate is commonly concluded by a number of YEC's because:

• The first account of creation in the bible states the earth was created in 6 days, meaning 6 days to have a fully functioning earth with the correct air mixture, climate, suitable land, drinking water and species to support life as we know it.
• Man was created on day 6.
• The bible states humanity has existed for approx 6000 years.
• A geneaology was given from the time of Adam to the time of Christ's birth - then add 2000 years for the "AD years".
  

Some people say 6K years and I've heard 8K years.

But what strikes me as frustrating in all of this is that whenever there is a contradiction in the bible or if there are facts that are known to be false given the scientific laws known today and the historical records from contemporary times, the "escape clause" is to say "well, it's a metaphor". My fear is that as more and more of the bible has to be explained away by metaphor, then at what point do we need to question if we are shoehorning the bible to read the way we think it should as opposed to reading it for what it really states?

Truthfully, I believe most stories in Genesis are simply stories that wasn't supposed to be taken literally. And the point of those stories are to display that if you have faith in god and does what he tells you, you're going to be rewarded. Then on the flip side, if you disobey god you will be punished, see Sodem & Gomorra and Adam & Eve being kicked out of Eden. As for the flood, I believe it's loosely based off of the flood story form the Epic of Gilgamesh, which was written nearly a thousand years before Moses wrote the flood story.

One must ask, why did a group of Mesopotamian/Caananite nomads chose to worship one god, while the rest of the Middle Eastern/Egyptian world, at that time, worshiped multiple nature gods?

I don't believe for a second that the Bible is chronologically correct. It does nothing IMO to change the story.

(07-28-2014 11:37 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  One must ask, why did a group of Mesopotamian/Caananite nomads chose to worship one god, while the rest of the Middle Eastern/Egyptian world, at that time, worshiped multiple nature gods?

Early hipsters?

Huh... Imagine that... People disagreeing on exactly what the bible means.

No WONDER there are hundreds, if not thousands of denominations.

Good thing we ALL agree on what the Constitution means... or the latest economic report.

(07-28-2014 11:37 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 10:20 AM)miko33 Wrote:  The 6000 - 7000 year estimate is commonly concluded by a number of YEC's because:

• The first account of creation in the bible states the earth was created in 6 days, meaning 6 days to have a fully functioning earth with the correct air mixture, climate, suitable land, drinking water and species to support life as we know it.
• Man was created on day 6.
• The bible states humanity has existed for approx 6000 years.
• A geneaology was given from the time of Adam to the time of Christ's birth - then add 2000 years for the "AD years".
  

Some people say 6K years and I've heard 8K years.

But what strikes me as frustrating in all of this is that whenever there is a contradiction in the bible or if there are facts that are known to be false given the scientific laws known today and the historical records from contemporary times, the "escape clause" is to say "well, it's a metaphor". My fear is that as more and more of the bible has to be explained away by metaphor, then at what point do we need to question if we are shoehorning the bible to read the way we think it should as opposed to reading it for what it really states?

Truthfully, I believe most stories in Genesis are simply stories that wasn't supposed to be taken literally. And the point of those stories are to display that if you have faith in god and does what he tells you, you're going to be rewarded. Then on the flip side, if you disobey god you will be punished, see Sodem & Gomorra and Adam & Eve being kicked out of Eden. As for the flood, I believe it's loosely based off of the flood story form the Epic of Gilgamesh, which was written nearly a thousand years before Moses wrote the flood story.

One must ask, why did a group of Mesopotamian/Caananite nomads chose to worship one god, while the rest of the Middle Eastern/Egyptian world, at that time, worshiped multiple nature gods?

That's an easy one. Only the one God helped them defeat their enemies.

(07-28-2014 05:51 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 07:51 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 03:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

But who needs that when you have a 2000 year old excerpt that says otherwise?

You shouldn't discount the possibility that God tweaked a few genes 6000 years back that made us into something different from what we were before that time.

Or that, being the old testament is the chronology and history of the israelites, the jews were created 6,000 years ago.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

I like that idea.

As a companion idea, the genealogy of the Old Testament may be a matter of documenting the genetic line. And it would follow that the flood was used to wipe out the competing genetic pools.

This not too far off of some of the ideas I've seen floating around. There are some incidents in the OT where God commanded that enemies all be killed and none spared. Perhaps this isn't a matter of their beliefs, but a matter of their genetics?

(07-28-2014 10:20 AM)miko33 Wrote:  But what strikes me as frustrating in all of this is that whenever there is a contradiction in the bible or if there are facts that are known to be false given the scientific laws known today and the historical records from contemporary times, the "escape clause" is to say "well, it's a metaphor". My fear is that as more and more of the bible has to be explained away by metaphor, then at what point do we need to question if we are shoehorning the bible to read the way we think it should as opposed to reading it for what it really states?

Except that it is a "metaphor", Miko. One day = one time span. Does that mean that one day was 1000 years? Not in my book... I have no clue how long one "day" should be.

Note that the metaphors are less effective when you work your way further along in the old testament and toward the New Testament.

Someone help me here. I seem to remember Satan destroying cities when he was kicked out of Heaven.

(07-28-2014 09:59 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 05:51 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 07:51 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 03:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

But who needs that when you have a 2000 year old excerpt that says otherwise?

You shouldn't discount the possibility that God tweaked a few genes 6000 years back that made us into something different from what we were before that time.

Or that, being the old testament is the chronology and history of the israelites, the jews were created 6,000 years ago.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

I like that idea.

As a companion idea, the genealogy of the Old Testament may be a matter of documenting the genetic line. And it would follow that the flood was used to wipe out the competing genetic pools.

This not too far off of some of the ideas I've seen floating around. There are some incidents in the OT where God commanded that enemies all be killed and none spared. Perhaps this isn't a matter of their beliefs, but a matter of their genetics?

A lot of people believe the flood and wiping out of the Canaanites were a genetic cleansing of the nephillim.

The nephillim were the children of a group of angels that came down to earth and bred with human females before the flood. Their offspring were considered giants and obviously not pure human anymore.

The angels who did this were thrown into a horrible prison like realm for several thousand years and forced to watch God and the Hebrews destroy and kill their children.

(07-28-2014 11:01 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Someone help me here. I seem to remember Satan destroying cities when he was kicked out of Heaven.

Revelation 12:4 likely refers to one-third of angels being deceived.

Babylon gets called out in Chapter 18, but most places on Earth probably won't make it past Revelation 16:17 intact.

(07-28-2014 07:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

I don't buy that the earth is billions of years old... by the same token I don't buy the creationist time line either. 4.5 or whatever billion you want to believe is just an unfathmobale amount of time. I would suspect to see wayyy more evidence to support that timeline, and I am not just talking about carbon dating or what have you.

LOL? Who gives a crap. You don't need anyone to buy anything when it comes to facts. Just like 1 will always be greater 0, no one cares if the public believes it or not. Facts are facts.

(07-29-2014 06:25 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 07:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

I don't buy that the earth is billions of years old... by the same token I don't buy the creationist time line either. 4.5 or whatever billion you want to believe is just an unfathmobale amount of time. I would suspect to see wayyy more evidence to support that timeline, and I am not just talking about carbon dating or what have you.

LOL? Who gives a crap. You don't need anyone to buy anything when it comes to facts. Just like 1 will always be greater 0, no one cares if the public believes it or not. Facts are facts.

40 years ago the Earth was considered to be 3 billion years old. Chances are in another 40 years the number will probably be upped again. The age of the Earth and Universe is something we are forced to infer with the little data on hand and methods of extrapolation that require multiple assumptions.

(07-29-2014 06:58 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 06:25 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 07:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

I don't buy that the earth is billions of years old... by the same token I don't buy the creationist time line either. 4.5 or whatever billion you want to believe is just an unfathmobale amount of time. I would suspect to see wayyy more evidence to support that timeline, and I am not just talking about carbon dating or what have you.

LOL? Who gives a crap. You don't need anyone to buy anything when it comes to facts. Just like 1 will always be greater 0, no one cares if the public believes it or not. Facts are facts.

40 years ago the Earth was considered to be 3 billion years old. Chances are in another 40 years the number will probably be upped again. The age of the Earth and Universe is something we are forced to infer with the little data on hand and methods of extrapolation that require multiple assumptions.

And 40 years ago we didn't have the technology we do today. Safe to say we are closer to the real number today than 40 years ago. We are going to keep getting more and more accurate, and not simply going arbitrarily change numbers every 40 years.

(07-27-2014 07:51 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 03:00 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

But who needs that when you have a 2000 year old excerpt that says otherwise?

You shouldn't discount the possibility that God tweaked a few genes 6000 years back that made us into something different from what we were before that time.

There's always refinement in measurements in science. As of now, cosmology can't explain what occurred in the first .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 second following the Big Bang. It's going to be difficult to get closer to the moment of creation.

(07-29-2014 05:57 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 11:01 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Someone help me here. I seem to remember Satan destroying cities when he was kicked out of Heaven.

Revelation 12:4 likely refers to one-third of angels being deceived.

Babylon gets called out in Chapter 18, but most places on Earth probably won't make it past Revelation 16:17 intact.

I'm referring to Satan being cast down and destroying cities, before the Garden and Adam and Eve.

Just something I heard years ago and have always meant to research. May not be Biblical. Just curious.

(07-29-2014 07:44 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 06:58 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 06:25 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 07:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-27-2014 02:55 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  The Earth is 4.54 Billion years old...and Humans are ~200,000 years old...these are things science can prove.

I don't buy that the earth is billions of years old... by the same token I don't buy the creationist time line either. 4.5 or whatever billion you want to believe is just an unfathmobale amount of time. I would suspect to see wayyy more evidence to support that timeline, and I am not just talking about carbon dating or what have you.

LOL? Who gives a crap. You don't need anyone to buy anything when it comes to facts. Just like 1 will always be greater 0, no one cares if the public believes it or not. Facts are facts.

40 years ago the Earth was considered to be 3 billion years old. Chances are in another 40 years the number will probably be upped again. The age of the Earth and Universe is something we are forced to infer with the little data on hand and methods of extrapolation that require multiple assumptions.

And 40 years ago we didn't have the technology we do today. Safe to say we are closer to the real number today than 40 years ago. We are going to keep getting more and more accurate, and not simply going arbitrarily change numbers every 40 years.

There is this assumption that I see everywhere that all scientific progress brings more accurate results. Is that really an accurate assumption? Does that somehow excuse being wrong?

It's okay if we're wrong - we're scientists. There is an elitism there that is, frankly, dangerous. It is the seed of intolerance that sometimes grows into the most damnable type of social destruction.

(07-29-2014 11:15 PM)Claw Wrote:  It's okay if we're wrong - we're scientists.

Not any more claw.. .Science is no longer about the proving/disproving of a hypothesis, it's all about making sure that the facts fit what you think they should fit.

One of my favorite things to do as a kid were those school science projects, and I can't tell you how many of them I did that disproved entire hypothesis that I'd been working to reach :)

(07-29-2014 11:15 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 07:44 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 06:58 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 06:25 AM)AirRaid Wrote:  

(07-28-2014 07:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  I don't buy that the earth is billions of years old... by the same token I don't buy the creationist time line either. 4.5 or whatever billion you want to believe is just an unfathmobale amount of time. I would suspect to see wayyy more evidence to support that timeline, and I am not just talking about carbon dating or what have you.

LOL? Who gives a crap. You don't need anyone to buy anything when it comes to facts. Just like 1 will always be greater 0, no one cares if the public believes it or not. Facts are facts.

40 years ago the Earth was considered to be 3 billion years old. Chances are in another 40 years the number will probably be upped again. The age of the Earth and Universe is something we are forced to infer with the little data on hand and methods of extrapolation that require multiple assumptions.

And 40 years ago we didn't have the technology we do today. Safe to say we are closer to the real number today than 40 years ago. We are going to keep getting more and more accurate, and not simply going arbitrarily change numbers every 40 years.

There is this assumption that I see everywhere that all scientific progress brings more accurate results. Is that really an accurate assumption? Does that somehow excuse being wrong?

It's okay if we're wrong - we're scientists. There is an elitism there that is, frankly, dangerous. It is the seed of intolerance that sometimes grows into the most damnable type of social destruction.

That doesn't make any sense. The real danger is making claims of absolute truth. The beauty of the scientific method is that there is always some level of uncertainty.

Real scientists are wrong all the time. My success to failure ratio is like 1:5