Time and the Creation Account

[37818]

What evidence do you have that Little Red Riding Hood was not real? No one needs evidence against a fable. Science models DO require evidence. Unless you had some you are welcome to your fable.

The science for an old universe stands. The Andromada Galaxy is relatively near by, only measured to be some 2.5 million light years away. At night when it is high in the sky it can be seen with the eye.

Not when the atoms are only identified here! When light arrives here, it then must operate according to what time and etc are like here. When there is a signature of an atom in that light, it is seen here. So, for example, if some atomic process out there took 6 seconds and it took 600 days here, that means the laws are really not all that common, or at least the time involved is not common.It also means that it is not in the past as you claim since that would requite time to be the same! What you thought was a billion light years could be ten light weeks away!

Are you simply speaking made up nonsense? Give the the actual case example.

The context in that chapter seems to be preaching the gospel. How would you like to relate that to this topic?

No. Rather about believing. There being no excuse not to believe the gospel, Romans 10:16, Isaiah 53:1.

The word of God [natural revelation] is the reason for the tent that our Sun is seen to move under. Psalms 19:4, ". . . In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, . . ."

 

[37818]

Creation is bible based. The fact that this world and universe will pass away aw we know it is bible based. That means we are in a temporary situation here. The world that was in Noah's day was greatly changed also. Adam's world was changed a whole lot also! When science uses this present world and nature only to try to tell us what the future and far past were like, they are dealing in absolute faith alone.

Either our Bible is the same word of God as His natural Revelation or our Bible we believe to be His word is not His word. There is what it says and there is how believers interpert it. Faith is either in truth [John 17:17, Titus 1:2] or wishful thinking, and then we are in trouble, 1 Corinthians 15:16-19, ". . . For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. . . ."

 

[dad2]

The science for an old universe stands.

Meaningless babble that you cannot defend or even discuss. There IS no science that can tell us what time itself is like in the far universe.

The Andromada Galaxy is relatively near by, only measured to be some 2.5 million light years away. At night when it is high in the sky it can be seen with the eye.

The galaxy is there, yes. The distance that you place on it by pure belief alone is religious nonsense.

Are you simply speaking made up nonsense? Give the the actual case example.

Are you unable to grasp a simple point even after being told repeatedly? You can use ANY isotope that decays. If we see it take so much time here to decay, that does not mean that the same time would be involved out in unknown space. No one knows what time is like out there.

No. Rather about believing. There being no excuse not to believe the gospel, Romans 10:16, Isaiah 53:1.

The gospel has what to do with your cheer leading false science exactly? You just felt like saying the word gospel, as if it helped your lack of a case??

The word of God [natural revelation] is the reason for the tent that our Sun is seen to move under. Psalms 19:4, ". . . In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, . . ."

Point??

 

[dad2]

Either our Bible is the same word of God as His natural Revelation or our Bible we believe to be His word is not His word. There is what it says and there is how believers interpert it. Faith is either in truth [John 17:17, Titus 1:2] or wishful thinking, and then we are in trouble, 1 Corinthians 15:16-19, ". . . For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. . . ."

Not sure what you mean by God's 'natural' revelation, or what this has to do with science and your old age/distance claims?

 

[37818]

Meaningless babble that you cannot defend or even discuss. There IS no science that can tell us what time itself is like in the far universe.

Which came first? Natural revelation or Holy Scripture?

 

[37818]

The galaxy is there, yes. The distance that you place on it by pure belief alone is religious nonsense.

That is what you do. Religious nonsense.

 

[dad2]

Which came first? Natural revelation or Holy Scripture?

What is 'natural revelation'? I think there was a serial killer that heard voices and one supposes he figured it was some sort of revelation. Are you talking about nature? Each nature is put there by God, so whether we were in Adam's day, or in the future millennium, or here today, each different nature would reflect the majesty and power of God...or...what are you talking about?

 

[dad2]

That is what you do. Religious nonsense.

Thanks for the definition then, I guess. Religious nonsense is when anyone else does not blindly accept the articles of faith you offer!

 

[37818]

What is 'natural revelation'? I

The creation and before the man Enoch who walked with God.

 

[37818]

Thanks for the definition then, I guess. Religious nonsense is when anyone else does not blindly accept the articles of faith you offer!

No. Irrational faith of any kind. Yours or mine.

 

[dad2]

The creation and before the man Enoch who walked with God.

The creation was a supernatural act so how would that be 'natural'? And what does Enoch have to do with anything?

 

[dad2]

No. Irrational faith of any kind. Yours or mine.

I do not consider faith in God and His word to be irrational whatsoever, sorry. Belief in origin fables that you cannot support as science or knowledge is very irrational faith.

 

[37818]

I do not consider faith in God and His word to be irrational whatsoever, sorry. Belief in origin fables that you cannot support as science or knowledge is very irrational faith.

Natural revelation is God's word which He gave before the written was given to mankind.

 

[dad2]

Natural revelation is God's word which He gave before the written was given to mankind.

So in other words when God spoke to folks. That was great. There was a time for that. I doubt you will produce anything He said then that contradicts His word to man today (Scripture) So what is the point of mentioning it, and how does it relate to anything here?

 

[37818]

The creation was a supernatural act so how would that be 'natural'? And what does Enoch have to do with anything?

Then do you deny God supernaturally created the natural?

 

[dad2]

Then do you deny God supernaturally created the natural?

Why would I deny that? Every time nature is changed God does it. When we enter the millennium the climate and world will be quite different. That is God's dong. The changes in Noahs day, Adam's day and at Babel were God's doing. So? I hope you don't think that God never changes the world or how it works?

 

[37818]

Why would I deny that? Every time nature is changed God does it. When we enter the millennium the climate and world will be quite different. That is God's dong. The changes in Noahs day, Adam's day and at Babel were God's doing. So? I hope you don't think that God never changes the world or how it works?

Well you understand the natural revelation will be replaced with new Heaven and Earth, Isaiah 65:17.

 

[dad2]

Well you understand the natural revelation will be replaced with new Heaven and Earth, Isaiah 65:17.

In a way heaven and the new earth and millennium are natural also, since made by God.That should tell us nature was not and will not always be the same. OK. Any other point?

 

[37818]

In a way heaven and the new earth and millennium are natural also, since made by God.That should tell us nature was not and will not always be the same. OK. Any other point?

Maybe. Our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is the beginning of the New Heaven and earth (Colossians 1:18, Revelation 3:14). And at His second appearing (Hebrews 9:28) we who are saved will be like Him, 1 John 3:2. The New Heaven and Earth will not be until after the Judgment, Revelation 21:11-15, Revelation 21:1.

 

[dad2]

Maybe. Our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is the beginning of the New Heaven and earth (Colossians 1:18, Revelation 3:14). And at His second appearing (Hebrews 9:28) we who are saved will be like Him, 1 John 3:2. The New Heaven and Earth will not be until after the Judgment, Revelation 21:11-15, Revelation 21:1.

Well, His new body was different from ours, so there you go. Things will be different. Things were also different in Noah's day in many ways. They were also different before the fall. The issue is not when the changes will come, but that this nature we have now is temporary. Yet science uses it to make models of the past and future and origins of life etc. If the forces and laws were different in the past here on earth, that means all dating methods are invalid beyond the time our present nature existed. It also means that looking at the adapting and evolving and genetics today cannot tell us about that far past. (as we do not know genetics works the same in a different nature exactly). It also means that it could have been a natural and normal course of events that most life on earth could not have left remains, and therefore would have no way of joining the fossil record. That means the fossil record is useless in telling us about life back in the far past also.Etc etc.