[_ Old Earth _] any christians here believe in astronomy?

[ArtGuy]

So then when the split occured, all of the spiritual photons which had been emitted by this star, but hadn't yet reached the earth, were converted into spiritual photons traveling at c, allowing us to see these stars today. Is that correct? If there were no such things as "spiritual photons", then where did the million year's worth of physical photons come from?

The former light was not physical only or in a PO universe, it left what we have with the split. How can you say what exactly the former light was in a non PO universe? All you know is the physical. The photons in our universe were so left as a result of the split, speculating on the nature of the former light is somewhat beyond your abilities. Why would spiritual light have photons, or the kind we know, or very many if any, etc? All we know is that we were left with the light we have, and somewhat how it works.

I see. How unfortunate that the upshot of all this is exactly the same as if the universe were 14 billion years old. If not for that striking coincidence, perhaps you wouldn't be the only person in the world who understands the truth.

[quote:62601]Why do you say 1000 years from now? Please cite the specific scripture that says the universe will end in 1000 years.

Because the new earth and heaven are revealed at the end of the millenium, which is the 1000 year reign here of us and Jesus after He comes.
...
[/quote:62601]

I am well familiar with those bits of Revelations. But all of those references to "1000 years" begin once Jesus returns from the heavens. As best I can tell, he hasn't yet. You seem to be implying that Jesus is going to be returning to the Earth really soon. Any evidence to support that notion? Because for all the Bible says on the matter, Jesus's return could be tomorrow, or in 1000 years, or in 10 billion years.

No, it makes me the first to have figured out the obvious, by looking at the bible, and the evidence, hopefully witth some inspiration. Not really any smartness involved. If we start out not assuming God is dead, weak, invalid, or a liar, and His word is true, we are halfway there. I am open for any better ideas, should they appear on the scene. As it is, I am pretty happy with the explanitory power of this one, where the bible is true in the past, and future, and science can't say a word, and is put in it's little PO present place!

You're a regular contemporary Cassandra, aren't you?

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

;-)

 

[dad]

...

I see. How unfortunate that the upshot of all this is exactly the same as if the universe were 14 billion years old.

Why wouldn't it be, how do you think we got here. blew out from a magically appearing speck or something? The bible clears that up pretty good.

[quote:49b48]I am well familiar with those bits of Revelations. But all of those references to "1000 years" begin once Jesus returns from the heavens. As best I can tell, he hasn't yet. You seem to be implying that Jesus is going to be returning to the Earth really soon. Any evidence to support that notion? Because for all the Bible says on the matter, Jesus's return could be tomorrow, or in 1000 years, or in 10 billion years.

[/quote:49b48]
Well, that is so far from a possibility, it isn't funny. The signs are laid out well, the countdown has begun, and we are well on our way for that renezvous with destiny as we apeak! Few things are left undone, the gospel is preached in all the world, earthquakes in different places, famines wars, pestilences, etc. all unfold before our eyes. The final king of the world is almost all that remains to be unfolded, but it cannot wait for long, as we are the generation that will see the end of these things.

Matt 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 

[dad]

Doppleganger says[quote:3eb13]Dad why dont you post your views in a thesis of what you believe instead of taking quotes from others and putting them down? I'd like to see what you really believe!

[/quote:3eb13]

I was a little short with you, because you can't be clear on what you are saying. 'What was Ike doing one obscure morning? Why are long headed fossils found? Why is Cain not what the bible actually says, but my unknown obscure theory instead? etc'
Now if you came out and said something like this, we might be able to address it in some earnest manner "I think aliens boinked cains wife, and many weird skulls of their offspring are my evidence, and the heiroglyphics confirm this, and Ike was trying to fight them when he caught on, but they whacked him one morning..." -- etc or whatever it was you actually were trying to say. Then someone could address it perhaps something like this " ..You rude little guy, though you don't deserve an answer, and keep posting after you say you're leaving, it's like this, you have no proof, you are dreaming, go back to your Art Bell show, and give your head a shake" ---or however they thought it need be answered. Get it?

 

[ArtGuy]

Why wouldn't it be, how do you think we got here. blew out from a magically appearing speck or something? The bible clears that up pretty good.

Uh huh. So your account must be true because you don't understand the alternatives. Makes sense.

Well, that is so far from a possibility, it isn't funny. The signs are laid out well, the countdown has begun, and we are well on our way for that renezvous with destiny as we apeak! Few things are left undone, the gospel is preached in all the world, earthquakes in different places, famines wars, pestilences, etc. all unfold before our eyes. The final king of the world is almost all that remains to be unfolded, but it cannot wait for long, as we are the generation that will see the end of these things.

There has been war, famine, and pestilence since the beginning of human history. Why are these wars any different? Especially given that the levels of war and pestilence we see today are considerably less than at most points in history. Hello, Black Plague? 100 years war? Crusades? Malaria infestations, small pox? What we see today is paltry compared to the past. You're saying that a profound decrease in war and pestilence is a sign of the end-times?

As to "final king of the world", if you think the world is going to unite under a single ruler in this generation, then your grasp of global politics is about as lacking as your grasp of the rest of the Bible.

Matt 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Yes, except we aren't actually seeing any of these signs. Well, at least us mortals aren't. You and your mystical precognition apparently have a better handle on things.

At any rate, I've beat my head against the wall quite enough. I leave you to your delusions.

 

[dad]

...
Uh huh. So your account must be true because you don't understand the alternatives. Makes sense.

I understand the big bang pretty good. It's foolishness is not what makes the bible true, however. The fact it is PO speculation means it is based on only present physical universe observations, which you can't prove in any way have a thing to do with the past or future.


[quote:1541a]There has been war, famine, and pestilence since the beginning of human history. Why are these wars any different?

The one shaping up in the middle east involves all the principle countries clearly named in the bible long long ago. War itself has been here as long as the sinful heart of man, true, but in combination with other things is a part of the signs of the end package that has been opened in our time.

Especially given that the levels of war and pestilence we see today are considerably less than at most points in history. Hello, Black Plague? 100 years war? Crusades? Malaria infestations, small pox? What we see today is paltry compared to the past. You're saying that a profound decrease in war and pestilence is a sign of the end-times?

Aids, widespread cancers, and etc are on a pretty big scale these days, no? Plus, if germ warfare is used, as it could be, that would be a lot of pestilence as well. You see, when the di is cast, and the ball started rolling, it doesn't mean everything has happened, it just means it has begun, and will happen in the window of time allotted.

As to "final king of the world", if you think the world is going to unite under a single ruler in this generation, then your grasp of global politics is about as lacking as your grasp of the rest of the Bible.

The antichrist will have whole countries that fight against him, but he will be a major world leader, whether you know it or not. Things can change very quickly.

Yes, except we aren't actually seeing any of these signs. Well, at least us mortals aren't. You and your mystical precognition apparently have a better handle on things.

Mr 13:10 - And the gospel must first be published among all nations.
It was never possible to have the gospel spread as it is today! We are seeing this fulfilled. Earthquakes in divers places, hey, wake up, man, we got them coming out the wazoo. Love of many wax cold, and many traveling to and fro, as Daniel says also bang on, and happening as we speak. The mark of the beast is close enough that we see how it could be brought in in a hurry, as well as no money, but the buy and sell bit covered with the implant, or mark. Etc etc. You don't have to believe it, millions realize we are in the end for real, but we won't settle that here.
One thing I can say, is that your billions of years before He returns, and 'it sounds like the sun burning out' stuff, is that we know the sun will still be here, so that is simply ruled out right there.

At any rate, I've beat my head against the wall quite enough. I leave you to your delusions.

[/quote:1541a]
Talk all you want, nothing else you can do, because there is not a speck of evidence the past or future will be the PO place you claim!!!! It is an unfounded, bogus claim, and only science, falsely so called, if any were crooked enough to try to call such claims science. (another sign of the end, by the way!) Ta ta.

 

[ArtGuy]

Hey. Hey, guys. I hear that people disagreeing with me is a sign of end-times. You've been warned.

 

[dad]

Hey. Hey, guys. I hear that people disagreeing with me is a sign of end-times. You've been warned.

It's true, it is a sign of the end, when men turn from the truth, and believe in these silly fables of the end time, that oppose the bible.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
They say we are but beasts, you know, I have had several admit to me they actually think they are relatives to flys, rats, and cockcroaches!!! No kidding!
How could something so bang on, describing modern so called higher halls of learning been written, if not by One who knew what was coming?
" 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient" !!
Ro 1:25 - Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
2Tim 3:1 This know also, that in the last days .......7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[ArtGuy]

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables

Fair enough, but you have to first demonstrate that a description of an old Earth is "fable" before you can use it as a sign of the end-times.

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
They say we are but beasts, you know, I have had several admit to me they actually think they are relatives to flys, rats, and cockcroaches!!! No kidding!
How could something so bang on, describing modern so called higher halls of learning been written, if not by One who knew what was coming?
" 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient" !!
Ro 1:25 - Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Umm... you know that Paul's letter to the Romans wasn't prophecy, it was a description of things that had already happened, right? This doesn't bolster your case, Cassandra.

I again wonder if you really understand the Bible, given how often you misrepresent passages from it. Are you truly not getting the meaning of it, or are you just disingenuously throwing out half-truths in a desperate attempt to make your case seem more plausible, in the hopes that I won't know any better?

 

[Khristeeanos]

Anybody care to read my siggie?

 

[dad]

..
Fair enough, but you have to first demonstrate that a description of an old Earth is "fable" before you can use it as a sign of the end-times.

It rules out the garden, the flood and creation, does it not, in a real way? Therefore Jesus, who talked of these things was wrong in your books? If He was right, the old earth belief is a fable, add to that the fact that you cannot prove the old Po earth fable, and that's a wrap!

[quote:38608]Umm... you know that Paul's letter to the Romans wasn't prophecy, it was a description of things that had already happened, right? This doesn't bolster your case, ....

But the things it touches on as the depths of sin men sink to are most fulfilled right now! Much more than then. Just because he wrote to some place in Rome doesn't mean it doesn't apply right now. As a matter of fact other places pinpoint that. For example Jesus Himself said the last days would be as the days.
"11:8 - And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."

In the end shall be as the days before the flood, and as Sodom and Gommorah, for example. Like Daniel said of the end time, "knowledge shall be increased". like the "ever learning" in Romans here, etc. If the shoe fits don't complain about it because it supposededly isn't prophetic. Some people are so wrapped up in the deadish interpretaion trip, they even say the letters to the churches in Revelations just applied long ago !! Or, when God was talking to some rinky dink king, and launched into talking about Lucifer, that was really just talking about the king, etc. Not being spiritually discerned really doesn't equip them to understand a spiritual book much, apparently. This chapter fits fine with this end time, probably better than it fit the time it was written, or the people then!!!

I again wonder if you really understand the Bible, given how often you misrepresent passages from it.

[/quote:38608]
Rest easy, I'm alright there.

 

[Hawkins]

I mean, I just seriously began to ponder this.. Scientists have been measuring the speed of light, and the distance of stars from earth for years now, and, well, we all know it takes, what, 8.5 minutes for light to travel from teh sun to the earth right? well, now, those stars, the closest one is 4 light years away (4 years) at the speed of light.. now, the milky way, the edge of it is calculated at 15 BILLION light years away from us.. so that would definately mean that alot of stuff existed, LONG before this earth here did right?

does anyone else get confused with these young earth theories and the fact that the stars created after earth, must have been there before, if we can see them now.. right?

1) We dont understand time, so we assumed that it runs constantly since the very beginning and till the end. I heard that our time runs in the speed of light, but since when?

2) We dont understand space so we assumed that a 3D wolrd and that's it, but why we cant see and perceive the higher dimensions (surely they exist)?

We just keep babbling in a sandbox pretending that we know everything.

Oh one more thing, we cant even sensibly explain fully what's been discovered scientifically regarding to the microscopic particles.

And science, well we dont fart randomly and wait for a result to prove us what's mathematically right and wrong. We *believe* and purposedly formulate the equations to proof the truth, and to explain what we see and perceive.

Yet outside the scope of science, we just lazily sitting there to wait for a result to pop up such that we can call it a *proof*, and without such a lazy *proof*, we refuse to believe anything.

It's ironic! :wink:

 

[ArtGuy]

It rules out the garden, the flood and creation, does it not, in a real way? Therefore Jesus, who talked of these things was wrong in your books? If He was right, the old earth belief is a fable, add to that the fact that you cannot prove the old Po earth fable, and that's a wrap!

It rules out the YEC interpretation of those events, yes. It doesn't mean they didn't happen. The first part of Genesis is far more sensical as an allegorical account of the beginning of the universe made accessible for a primitive people than as a literal historical account of how the universe began. Heck, even if you interpret every last word literally, you still need to determine the subtle meanings of each literal word. Translating an ancient tome written in Hebrew and Greek isn't exactly trivial.

At any rate, Jesus clearly wasn't lying, so the key is to examine his words, along with the text of Genesis, along with the actual observable phenomenon as communicated to us by Creation. Your problem is that you refuse to see the world around you for what it is. It's like opening a box that says "Contents: One Canine", finding a toaster inside, and swearing up and down that it's definitely a dog because that's what the box said. And when someone points out that "Canine" is the brand of the toaster, you tell him that he's a complete idiot, look, it's a dog, roll over boy!

And then you drop a dog biscuit into the slot, start a fire, and burn down your house.

[quote:bcea2]Umm... you know that Paul's letter to the Romans wasn't prophecy, it was a description of things that had already happened, right? This doesn't bolster your case, ....

But the things it touches on as the depths of sin men sink to are most fulfilled right now! Much more than then. Just because he wrote to some place in Rome doesn't mean it doesn't apply right now. As a matter of fact other places pinpoint that. For example Jesus Himself said the last days would be as the days.[/quote:bcea2]

You: "These are definitely the end times, because they fit the description seen in this prophecy!"

Me: "Er... that's not a prophecy. Not at all."

You: "Exactly! See, I've proven myself right!"

 

[ArtGuy]

Oh one more thing, we cant even sensibly explain fully what's been discovered scientifically regarding to the microscopic particles.

What do you find unsensible about it? We have a pretty good working model of subatomic phenomena down to a pretty basic level. There's certainly more to learn, but that will always be true.

 

[dad]

..
It rules out the YEC interpretation of those events, yes. It doesn't mean they didn't happen. The first part of Genesis is far more sensical as an allegorical account of the beginning of the universe made accessible for a primitive people than as a literal historical account of how the universe began.

Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
So Jesus, and others had it wrong here? It was some fable that really didn't happen?

2Pe 2:5 - And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; ]


Do you really think it is that difficult to determine withing a small margin of possible interpretation when the bible says Noah lived? No, that has been done. So we know why, when, where, and how, what part of this are you missing? How ought we to correct Jesus on His misconceptions, and misspeaking here?

[quote:41ffd] Heck, even if you interpret every last word literally, you still need to determine the subtle meanings of each literal word. Translating an ancient tome written in Hebrew and Greek isn't exactly trivial.

Don't get ridiculous about it. But it is all true.

At any rate, Jesus clearly wasn't lying, so the key is to examine his words, along with the text of Genesis, along with the actual observable phenomenon as communicated to us by Creation.

No, they key is to believe it, and see where the observations of mere men have fell short for some reason! This, I have done.

Your problem is that you refuse to see the world around you for what it is.

On the contrary, I see it precisely for what it is, where you fail utterly is in thinking that is the way it was!!!

It's like opening a box that says "Contents: One Canine", finding a toaster inside, and swearing up and down that it's definitely a dog because that's what the box said. And when someone points out that "Canine" is the brand of the toaster, you tell him that he's a complete idiot, look, it's a dog, roll over boy!

This is best applied to old agers, not to God.

And then you drop a dog biscuit into the slot, start a fire, and burn down your house.

Not all parables are equal, you might want to work on that a bit!

Me: "Er... that's not a prophecy. Not at all.

[/quote:41ffd]
It is prophetic, as we can plainly see, and alligns with the prophetic parts of the bible.
It fits the stuff clearly labeled as last day prophesy nip and tuck. It also fit the past, so it is not exclusively end time, as some other stuff, but so what, it is hand in glove with it!

 

[ArtGuy]

Do you really think it is that difficult to determine withing a small margin of possible interpretation when the bible says Noah lived? No, that has been done. So we know why, when, where, and how, what part of this are you missing? How ought we to correct Jesus on His misconceptions, and misspeaking here?

I think the Bible was not meant to be a dating tool, and using it as such is foolhardy. We have artifacts from the Middle East dating back 7000 years. We have writings that date back 5500 years. We have extensive knowledge of the Egyptian empire stretching back over 5000 years. All of this suggests that using the Bible as a glorified calender is, to put it not-so-delicately, a technicolor palette of dumb.

Don't get ridiculous about it. But it is all true.

True doesn't mean literal. Do you think the entirety of Revelations is going to be literally true? That we're going to see a literal multi-headed beast rise up and assume power? No, because you're not a complete cretin. I'm certain you recognize that this is metaphor and allegory. It is true, but it is not literal. You get the distinction, I trust?

No, they key is to believe it, and see where the observations of mere men have fell short for some reason! This, I have done.

And apparently the key is also to settle on an interpretation at random, at complete odds with every other person on the planet, and assert your complete inability to be mistaken unto the grave, selectively misinterpreting or ignoring evidence to the contrary as you see fit. Well met, sir. Well met.

[quote:abca6]It's like opening a box that says "Contents: One Canine", finding a toaster inside, and swearing up and down that it's definitely a dog because that's what the box said. And when someone points out that "Canine" is the brand of the toaster, you tell him that he's a complete idiot, look, it's a dog, roll over boy!

This is best applied to old agers, not to God.[/quote:abca6]

Did you really just use "I know you are, but what am I?" as a debating tactic? Wow. What are you, 12?

 

[dad]

...
I think the Bible was not meant to be a dating tool, and using it as such is foolhardy.

Guess God was whacked out when He got the idea in His head to put in the chronologies, so we would know then, in your view. He can't seem to get much right at all, apparently, if I were to take your word for things!

[quote:e4165] We have artifacts from the Middle East dating back 7000 years.

No we have artifacts that are dated incorrectly, and with the belief of a same old same old past, that is all. Just look closely at how it was dated, and it should quickly became apparent.

We have writings that date back 5500 years.

No, I don't think you do. Whether you refer to the giggles of giglimesh tales, or dating of Egypt, or, etc, the dates are wrong, where they go beyond the split. Very simple, and you cannot use anything but belief based past interpretation attempts to claim otherwise. Nothing!!!!!!!!!

We have extensive knowledge of the Egyptian empire stretching back over 5000 years.

Ha, no we have things like some unknown scrawler scrawling things on the back of some scroll, that include several spirit rulers. Even that joke is fragmentary!!!

All of this suggests that using the Bible as a glorified calender is, to put it not-so-delicately, a technicolor palette of dumb.

No, it is the epitome of wisdom, unchallengable by any science, and the way it was. You don't get pagan scrolls that compare to the meticulous, sacred manner the actual scripture was passed down!

True doesn't mean literal. Do you think the entirety of Revelations is going to be literally true?

The things we can take literally we should, and why not? Some things are so spiritual that a literal interpretation only in this physical world is obviously not meant. Most things are real, however, new jerusalem, for example, the antichrist, the rapture, the two witnesses, etc.

That we're going to see a literal multi-headed beast rise up and assume power?

If you know prophesy, it isn't hard to see that it means the same spirit that possesses the AC, ruled the other major kingdoms of this world in their time as well. There really is this ruler coming, who is in the form of a man.

No, because you're not a complete cretin. I'm certain you recognize that this is metaphor and allegory. It is true, but it is not literal. You get the distinction, I trust?

In this case, yes, the heads on the beast, or ruler were not physical heads, but represent something, but that can in no way be an excuse to try to spiritualize the bible.

And apparently the key is also to settle on an interpretation at random, at complete odds with every other person on the planet,

Don't be juvenile, sir. I agree with millions and millions of bible believers on the basics, like a YE, and the bible is the word of God, and we are in the end time, etc. Don't kid yourself. As for how so called science got it wrong, yes, I have uncovered a simple explanation that fits with science and the bible, and is science proof, that is not yet widespread. I have not had any YEC try to be at odds with me, that I recall. Certainly not using science, or the bible. No science is at odds with me, because no science can deal with the spiritual, or the merged past or future. Those who claim science, do it falsely, because it is only assumption and belief that things were PO, and the same, nothing else that is offered.

and assert your complete inability to be mistaken unto the grave, selectively misinterpreting or ignoring evidence to the contrary as you see fit. Well met, sir. Well met.

If you would stop squawking, and present evidence, we would see how you fare. You can't you have not, and heaven help our funny bones if you try.

Did you really just use "I know you are, but what am I?" as a debating tactic? Wow. What are you, 12?

[/quote:e4165]
Let the old ager that is without sin cast the first stone. Then I'll pick it up, and date it properly!

 

[ArtGuy]

If you would stop squawking, and present evidence, we would see how you fare. You can't you have not, and heaven help our funny bones if you try.

To what end? Everything I've argued, you respond with, "That can't be true, because it disagrees with my interpretation of the Bible, and I am obviously correct." I mention dates, and you reply that all dating methods are wrong. I mention how your interpretations of certain passages are flawed, and you tell me that I am wrong by virtue of the fact that I disagree with your interpretation. If God himself came down and told you that you were completely wrong, you would tell him to get bent because he was clearly a hallucination trying to dissuade you from the obvious truth. You have a single weapon in your arsenal, which is the declaration that anything that disagrees with you is clearly wrong by virtue of the fact that it disagrees with you.

You want cites? Fine. Here's info on radiometric dating techniques. Don't like radioactive decay methods? Fine. Here's an article on dendrochronology, which has been used to provide a year-by-year chronology stretching back 10,000 years. In that vein, here's a mention of the world's oldest tree, which is 4,767 years old. This makes it about 400 years older than when the flood was, and the only way that we could be mistaken about its age is if we didn't know how to count to 4,767. Here's something on various methods of calculating the age of the universe. And every one of these phenomena, every single instance of dating methods that show the universe to be very old, are consistent with one another. That is, we have dozens of means of dating the universe, and they all agree. That is, again, a mighty striking coincidence, considering we supposedly just make this stuff up as we go along.

Of course, you will tell me that all of these things are incorrect because they disagree with you, and further, you will do so without even bothering to read and understand them in their entirety.

 

[dad]

To what end? Everything I've argued, you respond with, "That can't be true, because it disagrees with my interpretation of the Bible, and I am obviously correct." I mention dates, and you reply that all dating methods are wrong.

You mention past decay, I ask how can you demonstrate there was any, other than assumption? Specifics. If there was no decay in a merged world, why, of course reverse engineering present decay won't yield any meaningful results.



[quote:15406] I mention how your interpretations of certain passages are flawed, and you tell me that I am wrong by virtue of the fact that I disagree with your interpretation.

Old age interpretaions only came to be in response to science, and what some thought at the time was a need to conform. compromise theories!

If God himself came down and told you that you were completely wrong, you would tell him to get bent because he was clearly a hallucination trying to dissuade you from the obvious truth.

He won't. He already came down, and talked of the time of the garden, and the flood, and the passing away of these temporary heavens! We have His word on it.

You have a single weapon in your arsenal, which is the declaration that anything that disagrees with you is clearly wrong by virtue of the fact that it disagrees with you.

No, there are interpretaions of the bible that really isn't the issue. The issue is old ages, and your complete inability to prove they are more than imagination. You can't just say something like ' Oh, it is believed, and felt, and assumed that the past was the same, so things must be old, and the bible must be a bunch of fables'. If you claim a same past, prove it, or be exposed assimply a believer.

You want cites? Fine. Here's info on radiometric dating techniques. Don't like radioactive decay methods?

They are fine, long as we stick to the present, in determining present rate of decay. They did not exist in the past and will not in the future, as a universal norm. So since you can't prove they did, what use are they for the past? None at all!

Fine. Here's an article on dendrochronology, which has been used to provide a year-by-year chronology stretching back 10,000 years.

No, it simply assumes present rates in the past, no relation to time in real life if the trees grew in days at some point as the bible indicates, now is it!!?

In that vein, here's a mention of the world's oldest tree, which is 4,767 years old. This makes it about 400 years older than when the flood was, and the only way that we could be mistaken about its age is if we didn't know how to count to 4,767.

Complete and utter speculation because since the split didn't happen till a century after the flood, tree rings are meaningless toward real time!!! They could have grown very very very fast then, Not now, then. Get it?

Here's something on various methods of calculating the age of the universe.

The article starts off with this "according to the Big Bang theory" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You gotta be kidding! The universe in a hot soup speck is PO present based backward extrapolations, and other PO past belief based fables!

And every one of these phenomena, every single instance of dating methods that show the universe to be very old, are consistent with one another.

Why would PO assumptions be dissimilar to each other? Heavens. So what, all vines springing from the same vile root! PO past assumption and belief, all of it! A_L_L!

That is, we have dozens of means of dating the universe, and they all agree.

[/quote:15406]

No they disagree with the bible, and only agree with their pitiful PO little selves, as sister specculations of no basis but belief!!!!!

Prove the past was physical only, as the present, or you have no case. Don't rattle of assumptions based on that belief, prove it, support it, evidence it, which you can't do, cause it is a croc.

 

[ArtGuy]

Fine. Here's an article on dendrochronology, which has been used to provide a year-by-year chronology stretching back 10,000 years.

No, it simply assumes present rates in the past, no relation to time in real life if the trees grew in days at some point as the bible indicates, now is it!!?

[quote:b64eb]
In that vein, here's a mention of the world's oldest tree, which is 4,767 years old. This makes it about 400 years older than when the flood was, and the only way that we could be mistaken about its age is if we didn't know how to count to 4,767.

Complete and utter speculation because since the split didn't happen till a century after the flood, tree rings are meaningless toward real time!!! They could have grown very very very fast then, Not now, then. Get it?
[/quote:b64eb]

I'll stick with this issue, because trying to argue a dozen different points at once is somewhat tedious.

So. Tree rings. Do you know what they are? They demonstrate periods of growth. If a tree grows quickly, then slowly, then quickly again, you will see a ring. Since trees grow more in the warm periods of the year than the cool periods of the year, and because they do this repeatably, it's pretty easy to determine the number of growing seasons that have occured - simply count the rings.

Now, you propose that the trees had to grow really, really fast after the flood. If that had happened, we would've seen one really big ring as the tree grew like gangbusters for a few days. Basically, what we would see is no ring structure in the middle of the tree. Since we see a ring structure clear through to the center, it's apparent that the growth of the tree coincided with periods of warm and cool - that is, annual growth periods.

In a tree with 4767 rings, that means 4767 growing seasons, which means 4767 years. (There was actually a tree that was in excess of 5000 years, but it died back in the 60's.) Now, nothing you've said - even if one is to swallow your PO business - can account for this. The tree must have existed post-flood, so it can't have somehow existed in your alternate universe where physics doesn't apply. It would have been "PO". Your hyper-evolution and super-speedy growth rates can't have happened, because the tree cores would've left signs of it by way of super-thick rings in the center. What we see here is a very accurate calender that goes back close to 5000 years, and is in explainable in very basic terms that you won't be able to distort.

So, please go on. Tell me how this is all some scientific conspiracy, and how your theory perfectly accounts for it.