Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
IRQ Conflict
Senior Member
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:01 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Location: AB. Canada
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#106

Post by IRQ Conflict » Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:21 pm

zoegirl wrote:I do not debate ANY of the scripture above. But how in the world you can think that these support YEC over OEC is beyond me. They all point to the wonder and majesty of God, His power, His wisdom, His unfathomable nature. Do we Old erather's deny this? Absolutely not. God's majesty and power and glory is evident in His creation as well as HIs word and they are both trustworthy.

So, here you have brought up irrelevant verses to the age question.
Oh Zoe (hey! that rhymes!) :D

Did you not read the post? Or did you just assume my intentions of those Scriptures were trying to argue for a YEC position?
ME wrote:I've got some news for you, all that is created is not only created by the Supernatural but is also sustained by the Supernatural.
I merely quoted Scriptures I thought would be relevant to the statement I posted just prior to the Scriptures themselves.

I think your looking to hard and are finding the boogie men under the bed that you seem to fear so much.
Hellfire

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain

User avatar
zoegirl
Old School
Posts: 3927
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:59 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: east coast
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#107

Post by zoegirl » Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:32 pm

Um, need I remind you that you brought up the opinion that we "cut and paste" and misuse scripture? Why do I need to search for boogieman when you provide ample reason to defend my faith and reasoning?

However
My apologies....I did rush through that and my sincerest apologies...that was mighty sloppy.

But still mystified as to why you felt like those verses were necessary? I have never stated that the processes were not supernatural in cause.


Here we must separate the idea that just because God established natural systems and cycles and processes this does NOT exclude His ACTIONS in maintaining and/or establishing it.

Good calvinist that I am, I know that no plan of God's can be thwarted. He created the heavens and the earth and the sustains it. I have never doubted it nor have I ever propsed anything else. All I have been doing is saying that He used billions of years to do this!

My sincerest apologies for not seeing that you were using those verses for somehting else. However, don't know why you think I disagree with this. Nor does this not take away from the fact that you have yet to address the YEC claims :D

User avatar
Kurieuo
Honored Member
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 6:25 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Progressive Creationist
Location: Qld, Australia
Has liked: 627 times
Been liked: 643 times

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#108

Post by Kurieuo » Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:34 pm

dad wrote:
Kurieuo wrote:Hi dad,

As you are so sure that Day-Age OECs are in your own words "butchering" Scripture, perhaps you would be willing to participate in a set debate with me along the lines of: YEC or Day-Age OEC. Which is more Biblical?

I would argue for the side that Day-Age beliefs are more Biblical, whereas you can argue that YEC beliefs are. Sound interesting? We would need to set some guidelines, for example, how the writings and responses should be set out such as openings, number of responses, closings, length of responses, time to respond, etc. But I am up for it if you are.

Kurieuo
Sounds a bit formal. Why not say what you think, here and now? No offense, but I don't feel [edit. ..that OEC is worth a big debate] The bible is really not all that complicated. The days were quantified with mornings and evenings, and plants were made a few days before the sun was made, ruling out long ages. Why not admit the reason you think you need to come up with long ages? Save us all a lot of time.
I really do find this revealing.

Perhaps you should just read my many previous posts on this issue in the past. All I have to say is in them.

User avatar
Gman
Old School
Posts: 6081
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:36 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Northern California
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#109

Post by Gman » Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:32 pm

dad wrote:No it isn't. Yec is a term for young earth creation. It is a gross misrepresentation of facts to say the earth is old. Science can't go there at all.
Why are you contradicting yourself?? Earlier you stated that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical. So where is your physical evidence for YEC?
dad wrote:So scientists have nothing to do with it. They are stuck in the fishbowl. They only dream of the past, and have no clue if it was different or the same. They have simply assumed. Period.
No... You have stated that the spiritual and physical evidence go hand in hand. Now you will have to pony up to your statements or an axe will have to drop soon...
dad wrote:No problem with it, that is right, long as it stays in the fishbowl of the present temporary state universe. Thus far, and no further. You shall not pass. I have no problem at all with science, just the silly so called science that is a myth, and tells tales of some same state past that never was.
The only silly science that exists is this one that was conjured up by these YEC folks.. Unfortunately they went head first into a warped interpretation of the Bible, and then when they found out later that it was wrong and instead of standing up like real men and confessing their fault, they went to tackle science and said that our science is wrong which is turning the Bible into fables.. Grow up and stop being prideful...
dad wrote:They need lose no faith at all, no science facts can challenge it. The fact is, they have nothing to say about creation week, or the future. They can only tell us how it now works, and that is all well and good...now.
Well it is now... And since you said that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical, the physical says that the earth is old.
dad wrote:Nonsense. A child could understand it, that is the way God had it written.
Perhaps you are suggesting that the Bible was written in crayon then too? It is the word of God, it needs to be respected, not to be turned into disneyland cartoons.
dad wrote:It was well understood for generations. It is the people that felt they needed to apologize for God, and make His word fit man's wisdom, that thought they needed to bend it out of shape.
Right, so stop bending the word of God..
dad wrote:Your God ought to read the bible. You would both learn something. Start with an open mind, not an all consuming need to compromise with man's silly little wisdom.
Another ad hominem attack like this and you're out.
dad wrote:Thank you for demonstrating what I just said. That is your concern, man, and his wisdom. Try God, and His wisdom. It is higher. Much higher.
Again, you stated earlier that the physical and the spiritual go hand in hand. Why is your concern for man and his wisdom then??
dad wrote:Their understanding was right. They were moved by God, not science. Inspiration, not compromise.
There are many interpretations of the Bible. We don't have any of the original writings of the Bible. Also where is your Jewish group today that is supporting this literal 7 day interpretation?
dad wrote:I didn't do anything like that. I took the Hebrew meaning, and it was day. The context was, by the mornings and evenings, and other things, a day, as we think of a day. As Jesus thought of a day. As God thought of a day, walking in the cool of the day in the garden. Give it up.
You are cherry picking and warping the Bible to fit this weak science. Stop denying it...
Do you know what speaks for God?
dad wrote:The bible.
Wrong.. Not only does the Bible speak for God, but it also comes from people.
dad wrote:He told us, and Jesus told us, and it works.
Well the Mormons believe in Jesus too.. Are you suggesting that they are right too?
dad wrote:Yes, the ones that bought into man's wisdom. They are without excuse. As I pointed out, science can't cover the bible past or future.
Well you are wrong again... Read your seventh post on the first page. You stated that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical. Which is it?
dad wrote:Really. Get it?
Got it..
The heart cannot rejoice in what the mind rejects as false - Galileo

We learn from history that we do not learn from history - Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable, if anything is excellent or praiseworthy, think about such things. -Philippians 4:8

User avatar
jenna
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:36 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Gap Theory
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 23 times

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#110

Post by jenna » Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:52 pm

I think this is really getting old! Repeating myself (again) WHO REALLY CARES? Does it really matter WHEN the earth was made, or WHY it was made? It seems like everytime I read a new post, someone's bickering about the age of the earth. Can't we MOVE ON, PEOPLE? :evil: :roll:
some things are better left unsaid, which i generally realize after i have said them

User avatar
Gman
Old School
Posts: 6081
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:36 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Northern California
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#111

Post by Gman » Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:03 pm

jenwat3 wrote:I think this is really getting old! Repeating myself (again) WHO REALLY CARES? Does it really matter WHEN the earth was made, or WHY it was made? It seems like everytime I read a new post, someone's bickering about the age of the earth. Can't we MOVE ON, PEOPLE? :evil: :roll:
We believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. Not only does it address the spiritual but it also addresses the physical (Genesis 1). If someone says that the science we understand today (the facts) contradicts what the Bible says, then we have a problem. It needs to be addressed and taken seriously. Not glossed over... This is way more important than any stock market or latest spiderman 3 movie.
The heart cannot rejoice in what the mind rejects as false - Galileo

We learn from history that we do not learn from history - Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable, if anything is excellent or praiseworthy, think about such things. -Philippians 4:8

User avatar
jenna
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:36 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Gap Theory
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 23 times

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#112

Post by jenna » Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:09 pm

No, if someone says that the bible contradicts something, then obviously THEY have a problem, not those who believe and truly know what the bible says. Something may need to be addressed, yes, but how far are you willing to go? Until you're ready to climb walls (can I be spidey this time?) :lol:
some things are better left unsaid, which i generally realize after i have said them

User avatar
Gman
Old School
Posts: 6081
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:36 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Northern California
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#113

Post by Gman » Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:22 pm

jenwat3 wrote:No, if someone says that the bible contradicts something, then obviously THEY have a problem, not those who believe and truly know what the bible says. Something may need to be addressed, yes, but how far are you willing to go?
Sorry... I'm addressing your statement "who really cares". I do... And YEC mocks God in my Bible. It belongs in the science fiction section.
jenwat3 wrote:Until you're ready to climb walls (can I be spidey this time?) :lol:
I already have, without any webs too... Sure you can be spidey, I will just use my cape. :D
The heart cannot rejoice in what the mind rejects as false - Galileo

We learn from history that we do not learn from history - Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable, if anything is excellent or praiseworthy, think about such things. -Philippians 4:8

User avatar
jenna
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:36 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Gap Theory
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 23 times

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#114

Post by jenna » Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:28 pm

Wow, I never really put much stock in what someone else says if it conflicts with what I know to be truth. I guess I didn't think about it that way. I always thought that if someone else thinks differently, then I should try to get them to see the truth. If they don't want to hear it or want to argue, then they aren't going to listen no matter if Jesus Himself came and spoke to them. So why bother? :? So you got your cape yet?
some things are better left unsaid, which i generally realize after i have said them

dad
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#115

Post by dad » Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:29 am

IRQ Conflict wrote:
I understand what your saying. But upon closer inspection, who was Jesus but the Word of God aka The Holy Bible, The Living Word ect. Here we have someone "having the form of godliness but denying the power thereof".
Augustine denied the bible? Or did he merely get some things wrong?
When someone says they won't believe the Bible (Jesus) save for mans interpretation they are saying they don't believe in Jesus are they not? I know this is thin ice 'a white lie' type of semantic, but I firmly believe in "the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth so help me God"
Well, how could we judge that? Or should we even be trying to do so? I also wonder if we really have to believe the whole bible to be saved? I thought all we needed to do was believe in Jesus. Some might do that with only hearing, say 1 verse, like John 3:16. They would still know the truth, because Jesus is the truth.
1Jn 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Some apparently abide in different ways than others. I guess long as we do the best we can.
With me it's all or nothing. I can appreciate your view of making a mistake, but what this fella was promoting was outright blasphemy. Lest we forget that God holds those who teach to a higher standard than the rest of us.
Well, as I say, I don't know much about Augustine. Maybe I should google his basic beliefs some day.
Near as I have found he was labeled an apostate.
OK, so that kinda rules him out as some mainstream rep. The real reason the old age bible interpreting came to be popular, then, might be as I claimed, a perceived need to get in line with science.

dad
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#116

Post by dad » Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:35 am

Kurieuo wrote:
dad wrote:
Kurieuo wrote:Hi dad,

As you are so sure that Day-Age OECs are in your own words "butchering" Scripture, perhaps you would be willing to participate in a set debate with me along the lines of: YEC or Day-Age OEC. Which is more Biblical?

I would argue for the side that Day-Age beliefs are more Biblical, whereas you can argue that YEC beliefs are. Sound interesting? We would need to set some guidelines, for example, how the writings and responses should be set out such as openings, number of responses, closings, length of responses, time to respond, etc. But I am up for it if you are.

Kurieuo
Sounds a bit formal. Why not say what you think, here and now? No offense, but I don't feel [edit. ..that OEC is worth a big debate] The bible is really not all that complicated. The days were quantified with mornings and evenings, and plants were made a few days before the sun was made, ruling out long ages. Why not admit the reason you think you need to come up with long ages? Save us all a lot of time.
I really do find this revealing.

Perhaps you should just read my many previous posts on this issue in the past. All I have to say is in them.
Well, no thanks. If you had a point you could make it here and now. I don't like homework assignments. I notice you haven't addressed the issue of why the old age bible interpreting became popular. How revealing.

User avatar
Kurieuo
Honored Member
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 6:25 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Progressive Creationist
Location: Qld, Australia
Has liked: 627 times
Been liked: 643 times

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#117

Post by Kurieuo » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:02 am

dad wrote:Well, no thanks. If you had a point you could make it here and now. I don't like homework assignments. I notice you haven't addressed the issue of why the old age bible interpreting became popular. How revealing.
People are drawn to truth perhaps? Maybe you see a connection because YEC seems to have arisen as a fideist reaction to the extreme skepticism and scientism of the Enlightenment. It has not always been around you know in the form it is held today.

dad
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#118

Post by dad » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:09 am

Gman wrote: Why are you contradicting yourself?? Earlier you stated that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical. So where is your physical evidence for YEC?
The evidence is what Usher used to come up with dates. There are lifespans given, that can be added up. Within a fairly small degree of possible interpretive time margins. If, as I say must have happened, that the universe was different in the past, how could we use the temporary physical present for evidence of a past that was not at all the same? Don't contradict yourself. The bible evidences of the differences abound.

No... You have stated that the spiritual and physical evidence go hand in hand. Now you will have to pony up to your statements or an axe will have to drop soon...
Where did I say that rot? Looks like the ax already came down on your claims. Boom. How sweet it is. Try and get some sort of grip of the facts, and what you claim people think, or say. That would be a lot simpler than making stuff up! Occam would smile on you.
The only silly science that exists is this one that was conjured up by these YEC folks..
No, theirs is weak. Your so called science claims of the whole universe being in a little hot soup, so small, it was invisible to the naked eye are what is silly. Also, the silly claims that there was no creation, but that we are pond scum, who are relatives to the flatworm, and cockroach.
Unfortunately they went head first into a warped interpretation of the Bible,
By this you mean, that they actually tried to accept it for what it says, and believe it. Nothing wrong with that.
and then when they found out later that it was wrong and instead of standing up like real men and confessing their fault, they went to tackle science and said that our science is wrong which is turning the Bible into fables.. Grow up and stop being prideful...
Strawman. There is no fault in believing the bible, and you better get used to folks saying your phony science claims are wrong. They are very wrong. Your myth of a same past is dead in the water. I will be happy when the world is really onto you.

Well it is now... And since you said that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical, the physical says that the earth is old.
No, it says nothing of the sort. It says that it now works a certain way. Like decaying. The rest you assume, that the past was the same, and also in decay, etc.
Perhaps you are suggesting that the Bible was written in crayon then too? It is the word of God, it needs to be respected, not to be turned into disneyland cartoons.
Jesus said that He hid these things from the wise, and revealed them to babes. Such is the true wisdom. God sent the bible for man, and made it pretty simple. You better get a crayon to draw your pond scum, cause that is the only way the fable will be seen.

Right, so stop bending the word of God..
Say what? The years Adam lived are pretty clear. The years he lived, till his son was born, and how long the son lived are also clear. Pretty well on down the line. No billions of years available, so who is bending???
Again, you stated earlier that the physical and the spiritual go hand in hand. Why is your concern for man and his wisdom then??
Anyone speak English here? Maybe translate this guy's material? Man's wisdom is not a major concern to God. He out and out says it is foolishness. Is that OK with you??
There are many interpretations of the Bible. We don't have any of the original writings of the Bible. Also where is your Jewish group today that is supporting this literal 7 day interpretation?
We have the scriptures, passed on, and preserved, and the records of the early Christians. Are you suggesting that God is incapable of getting a record for man handed down?

Wrong.. Not only does the Bible speak for God, but it also comes from people.
So? People speak for God as well. You think He is a mute?? Or dead?
Well the Mormons believe in Jesus too.. Are you suggesting that they are right too?
They must be right about some things. Are you suggesting they are all wrong??? What, am I supposed to hate them now?
Well you are wrong again... Read your seventh post on the first page. You stated that the bible deals with the spiritual as well as the physical. Which is it?
The bible does deal with those things. So?? What has that got to do with pointing out the obvious limitations of science?

dad
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#119

Post by dad » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:14 am

jenwat3 wrote:I think this is really getting old! Repeating myself (again) WHO REALLY CARES? Does it really matter WHEN the earth was made, or WHY it was made? It seems like everytime I read a new post, someone's bickering about the age of the earth. Can't we MOVE ON, PEOPLE? :evil: :roll:
The issue is, do we believe the bible, really, or not. Do we move on, and toss out the flood?? Do we move on, and toss out the garden of Eden? Where do we stop??? How about the lifespans of Adam, and sons, on down to near recorded history?? Is that all bunk? There cannot be old ages, and a true God that gave us a bible that is actually true. He does not need any man to apologize for the bible, just to believe it, --or not.

dad
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Gen 1 Defies Physics Laws

#120

Post by dad » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:25 am

Kurieuo wrote: People are drawn to truth perhaps? Maybe you see a connection because YEC seems to have arisen as a fideist reaction to the extreme skepticism and scientism of the Enlightenment. It has not always been around you know in the form it is held today.
The science that opposes God, and the bible is darkness, not enlightenment. Old ageism is a Johnny come lately. It comes with the package deal of so called science. The myths of so called science replace the true creation, and bible history. I, for one, have the guts to stand up, and hold a standard against that flood of lies.

The OP brought out, that physics laws could not have been in place. If not, then it is high time we put them in their place! The time is past, that any need at all to cow tow to them existed. Get up, and stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.. If God be God, then act like it. If you can't join the fight, at least don't cheer for the enemy.

Post Reply