Earthage 101
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Earthage 101

A creationist forum to discuss how old the Earth is...All about how God may have done it. No argument whether God did it. We all believe he did.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Young Earth or Old Earth? Here is where to post your thoughts!

+3
BrokenMan
InfinitLee
sumiala
7 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 9]

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Hi Bret,
I am forced to keep reinterating because I never seem to get an honest thoughtful reply. I always get regurgitated BALONEY hurled at me. So I keep trying to address your fallacious statements with factual information that shows your errors and then you just keep missing the point and hurl away again. This time I used the Hebrew definitions of the words that God spoke. I don't know how many other ways I can write down the logical arguments against your claim: 'God spoke everything into existence'. I will keep trying though until your blindness is gone. God did speak, no question about that, but when He spoke, he made a statement of fact; natural entities (waters and earth) brought the animals into existence. He didn't, He 'let' nature do it for Him. This is the point you miss over and over. It is like you keep reading only the first three words of the statement: 'And God said'. Then you ignore His statement of fact after it.

Use any existing translation you want, they each say something like, 'let the waters swarm' (ASV), 'let the waters teem' (YLT), 'let the land produce' (NET), 'let the earth sprout' (ESV), 'let the earth bring forth' (ASV), etc. None of them say, 'God spoke the plants and animals into existence. Would you stop saying 'The Bible says that God spoke things into existence!'. scratch It is a flat out misrepresentation of what the Bible actually states. It is BALONEY! Talk about intellectual dishonesty! The YEs seem to have cornered the market in its use! Twisted Evil
I have asked this many times and received nothing serious in reply. Arrow How can you read God's Word and get this strange interpretation from it? None of the various versions indicate anything other than the earth, land, or waters bringing plants and animals into existence. None of them indicate that God brought them into existence. All of them indicate, by God's own words, that He 'let' these natural creations of His bring forth or produce the plants and animals. Of course you can't justify your claim and that is why you avoid trying! Wink

Lee

17Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty *** Common Sense vs. Common Descent *** Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:32 pm

lordfry

lordfry

Lee ...


If I had a nickel for every word that you've typed on this Blog
I could retire alongside you ... and have more free time to refute
the SAME old tired Straw-Man arguments that you keep "creating" over
and over and over again and again and again !!! Arrow

As far as I know ... no Young Earth Creationist (including myself)
wrote any of the translations of the Holy Scriptures ???
Linguistic Specialists and Historians are the ones that take on
these endeavors! Not Scientists, Physicists, or Mathematicians!
Even though you can find some Scholars that will agree that certain
words in Greek & Hebrew can be translated to mean different things ...
NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THE HUNDREDS OF TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE
HAVE EVER PROMOTED WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THAT THEY "SHOULD" SAY !!!

Why? ... WHY ???
Why would these EXPERTS of translation (without a scientific axe to grind)
consistently keep translating God's Word to read to my narrative?
There IS obviously a market out there for an Old Earth Translation
of the Bible ... so it MUST be intellectual honesty that keeps one
from actually ever being written!

Darwinian Gradualism is the most vacuous Scientific Theory to still
exist in this enlightened era of Scientific advancement !!!
Punctuated Equilibrium at least was an attempt to "create" a Theory
that better fits the actual Scientific data ... but started to sound
too much like "popping"... and needed a God to supply the combustion!

Just for the record AGAIN !!!
I never said that Creation had to be "instantaneous" or that the act
of creating things involves a popping sound? bom

The Bible says that God spoke things into existence!
He would start speaking in the "morning"... and then finished speaking
in the "evening" of each day!
I'm not sure if God speaks with a slow southern drawl ... or if He spoke
more like that guy in the old Fed Ex commercials?
But I'm guessing that the speed of creation falls somewhere in between?
And the only day that may have included some popping sounds would have
to be the 6th day ... because it was the first time that there was anyone
else around to pull God's finger? lol!



Bret 2013™️




InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Bret et al,
This is the easiest time I've had in keeping a New Year's resolution thanks to the unusual silence from the YEs. Nothing, not one irrational claim to deconstruct or refute in a whole month!  Wow! Bret,  are you sure you're really back? silent

We've been waiting for two years Sleep for a rational set of Biblical based arguments to justify the YE creation story of instantaneous popping of plants and animals into existence by God using an alternate set of physical laws.  So far your side has only provided two arguments to justify their position:
1) A simple straightforward literal reading of Genesis 1 is claimed to be sufficient proof of God's instantaneous creation of all plants and animal kinds.
2) Genesis 2:7 Where YEs interpret this verse to mean that God formed man directly from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into him in a very short time period much less than a 24 hour day.  
Both arguments are flawed in their reasoning as summarized below and more extensively in prior posts:

1) study A straightforward reading of Genesis 1, however,  indicates God guided evolution by letting nature through the earth sprout plants (erets dasha deshe), the ocean breed animals (mayim sharats sherets) and the earth bring forth breathing animals (erets yatsa chay nephesh).  The Hebrew terms used in each indicate natural procreative processes based on other uses of these terms throughout the Bible. They do not imply miraculous instantaneous creation. On 'DAY' six they, the Trinity, make  man with a spiritual capability like themselves. There is no indication in Genesis 1 that the process is changed or unnatural in how God makes living beings, only that their characteristics are different: the Trinity made man like themselves (to include a spiritual attribute).  God spoke as to how each kind was made by earth and water, but didn't say that He made any of them instantaneously by popping them into existence.

Humans have unique characteristics among all plants and animals; we are made by the Trinity to include some attributes 'like' theirs. Careful study shows that unlike all other animals, we are capable of reasoning with, the understanding of, and the communication of abstract complex concepts.  We're the only animal capable of acquiring knowledge and wisdom related to performing acts of good and evil!   In a simple straight forward way, Genesis 1 tells us that God has made mankind like Him through and using nature.  

Genesis 1 does not say that God created each species instantaneously fully formed and mature. To claim this is nothing more than bad exegesis or worse: foolishness involving intentional deception.

2) Rolling Eyes The second claim is based on insistence of a YE biased literal interpretation of the phrase 'formed the man from the soil' and 'breathed through his nostrils the breath of life' to mean miraculous instantaneous creation.  The YE viewpoint does not permit a partially literal and somewhat symbolic interpretation which permits a much longer period of formation.  However, creation can occur over a great length of time if God guided evolution is considered as His process for making plants and animals.

The Genesis 2 account starts by concluding the Genesis 1 narrative of an overall summary of God's Creation.  Then it switches gears in a more symbolic sense to elaborate on the creation of mankind and its fall from grace because of sin and its consequence of separation from Him. 

Why do we know that Genesis 2 contains symbology? It is because the account includes language about the 'tree of life' and the consequences of eating fruit called 'the knowledge of good and evil'. Most Biblical scholars will tell you that the eating of the fruit from the 'knowledge of good and evil' tree by Adam and Eve is symbolic of committing sin (any sin) and not physically eating a new fruit called 'the knowledge of good and evil' as if it could be bought in markets.  Fruit is used extensively throughout the Bible to symbolize the results of our good or bad activities. Similarly, we know there is symbolism because of the non-existent deceptive talking serpent in the story which was intended to symbolize Satan tricking Eve into partaking of sin.  Also, there were angels with whirling flaming swords stationed at the perimeter of Eden to prevent the sinful couple from re-entering.  This colorful description makes the symbolic point that Adam and Eve were intentionally separated from God and outside His protection.  There is no reason to believe that these examples were the only allegory in the biblical account. 

The fact that mankind as well as all plants are formed from soil or dust as stated in Genesis 2:7 supports all creation methods including God guided evolution.  Even the scientific accounts claim this as well; stardust as a matter of fact.  Science has proven that all matter, including that used in plants and animals, contains the same set of atoms and molecules.  The only difference in any of earth's biological creatures is the organization of its matter (the informational content of each individual organism).  All are made of the same elements occurring in the periodic table with all of the biologically useful elements contained in dust or soil.  So Ge 2:7  makes a literally factual statement about man (as well as all living creatures).  

However, next, it is rather clear there is some symbolism related to the breath of life which God breathed through Adam's nostrils. Since God is a spiritual being not made of matter or utilizing our world's physiological processes, the breath of life means something quite different and more than breathing air through Adam's nostrils.  This phrase is more symbolic than literally giving Adam his first breath of air.  This verse is symbolically inferring that God gave Adam spiritual life as the Trinity was making Adam like themselves according to Genesis 1:26-27.  This 'life' was special and distinct from physiological life given to plants and animals that preceded Adam.  If one reads this verse in a pure literal sense, they miss a key point it is making symbolically.

Another consideration is that the time to form man from soil or dust is not identified in Genesis 2. YEs insist that 'DAY' six must be only 24 hours to support their instantaneous creation hypothesis.  However, for the YEs to claim this day was only 24 hours runs counter to several statements in Genesis 2. It takes thousands of years for rivers to slowly form by erosion of rock and soil from melting snow and flowing water, yet Eden is created at the junction of several rivers.  Another obvious one is the statement that God caused the trees to grow in the Garden to maturity and produce fruit.  This does not occur naturally in less than 24 hours. This normally takes many years if God 'caused them to grow' as the Bible states they did.  It also requires time to find and name all of the animals. It also takes time to develop and learn a language to communicate between humans or other species;  not to mention the time it takes for a talking serpent if at all possible (or Satan) to learn it.  The events described within Genesis 2 couldn't possibly have occurred in a 24 hour day.  Consequently, 'DAY' six as well as the preceding 'DAYS' must be much longer and therefore allow other methods of forming and giving life to man as well as other plants and animals than instantaneous popping. 

Therefore, the YE's insistence that instantaneous popping of species is the method that God must have used based on time limitation of one 24 hour day is not rationale based on review of all Biblical verses in Genesis 1 and 2.  It is very sad to see that the majority of Christians still believe in this incorrect and distorted interpretation of Creation since it has no basis. Christian credibility is constantly hammered by the secular world because of belief in this unsubstantiated and purely fictional YE view. YEs should declare their error in exegesis before more souls are lost and since this propaganda is untrue.

If you have more Biblical support for your claim than those above, let's see it?  Otherwise, the debate is surely over and your side has lost based on the evidence you've provided!

Lee Smile



Last edited by InfinitLee on Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:38 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : grammar and spelling corrections)

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

To All YEs drunken ,
Have your ever considered that the reason that John Q Public and educators Shocked lose their trust in the Bible and becomes antagonistic to Christians is because of your insistence that creation occurred in six 24 hour days (or six millenia according to some of your brethren). This faulty concept has clearly been disproven by rock solid scientific investigation! study You have now locked yourself into a losing position because of this faulty interpretation of a few beginning verses of the Bible. You fail to see and recognize the significant amount of symbolism in the Bible; instead you take everything literally from translated English versions. Other verses and the original Hebrew version contradict your interpretation as I have shown throughout this debate. You need to reset your position and accept the old earth version (the one God and the Genesis author intended in the original Hebrew writings).

You are helping to bring about the end as more and more people distrust the Bible because of your propaganda which many of us know is not true! Wake up and stop helping Satan Evil or Very Mad fight his battle against God!

I am eagerly looking forward to destroying each of your YE arguments that you present in the year ahead! How about starting with some responses to my counter arguments that I have already made? Happy New Year! Very Happy

20Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty *** Final thought for 2012 *** Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:24 am

lordfry

lordfry

Wow ...


Another year is coming to an end ... and in many ways ... the Mayans were right?
Everything has lined up so quickly to fulfill the prophecies of Daniel & Revelations
that the Tribulation period could literally start almost any day now?
Which brings me to my MAIN concern about why this AOTE (Age of the Earth) debate
is such a prevalent and important issue as we head to the finish line!

I don't worry about the mild increase in the acceptance of Atheistic philosophy!
The Antichrist will proclaim himself as the creator deity at the mid-point of the tribulation!
But ... he needs the gullible masses to lose confidence in the clear (straight-up) reading of
the Bible as the inerrant Word of God!
The Bible clearly warns us of this coming Antichrist ... and of his false proclamation to come!
The only way that Satan has any chance of fooling the masses (even if it is only for a season)
is if he can create doubts about the credibility of God's Word ... the way it is written?

So you see ... I really couldn't care less about the actual numeric value attached to the days of creation!
But ... when God uses terms like the "Morning" & the "Evening" when defining each "Day"... and then I am
supposed to believe that the Greatest (more accurately "The PERFECT")... communicator is describing six
periods of creation that vary in length from millions to billions of years ... and also overlap each other
to varying degrees and lengths as well ... is more than just crazy! It is dangerous !!!

The most painful fact about this is knowing that my side is destined to lose!
Not because I am wrong ... but because God has told us about this bit of final history in advance!




20Bret12™ *** Post #300 !!! ***


21Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty *** MERRY CHRISTMAS !!! *** Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:24 am

lordfry

lordfry

The fact that Lee & I can fully agree on issue #5 is truly a Festivus miracle worth noting & celebrating!
We may enjoy juggling some flaming torches over an ocean of holy gasoline ...
but the fact that we understand (without equivocation) that Jesus is the only One supplying
the eternal flame retardant suits ... FREE for the asking ... is the greatest Christmas gift of all ... !!! santa

Please add Stu's wife Gail to your prayer list ... as she is recovering from cancer surgery and will begin
to undergo several months of Chemo Therapy! These are two of the nicest people that I have ever met! I love you



20Bret12™️

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Bret,

Hopefully the red text is an indication of your holiday spirit and not hostility.  It is so nice to finally see an answer to Dave's questions from the YE side. Unfortunately the answers leave a lot to be desired in that they do not address the issues in most cases. In others, they are simply incorrect statements. It is very hard to find common ground between us when statements by the YEs simply ignore certain words or some verses of the Bible. The rigid literal interpretation of all verses without the intended inclusion of extensive symbology in scripture compounds the difficulty as well. I've identified the problems with your statements for each of the questions below.

Q1) It seems strange that for someone that believes that 'God is timeless', that same person tries to force the rest of us to believe that God operates within a strict human 24 hour day because a subset of humans (the YEs) interpretation of the Bible that Hebrew 'Yom' can only mean 24 hours. Also when Peter said 'as' or 'like' a thousand years, the YEs say it must mean exactly 1000 years. How do you know that Peter didn't mean an extensive period of time much longer than a thousand years in a symbolic sense? Peter spoke in Aramaic and 1 Peter was written in Greek over a hundred years later. The word million didn't come into use until the 14th century, and the word billion didn't come into use until the 1800s.  The English word 'day' didn't come into use until medieval times centuries after Peter spoke his words.  Check your word history! If any LIES have been made, it is from the hands and mouths of the YEs passing on Satan's deception roughly six centuries ago that the Hebrew 'Yom' must mean a single human 24 hour day in the original English Bible translation of Genesis.  

Q2) Your response to Dave's point was totally missed on question 2. I've addressed the issues with the YEs misunderstanding of order in prior posts:
Middle Creation 'Week', and The Fifth Creation Day years ago back in Oct 3 2009 and Nov 15 of 2009 .  

Plant creation lasted much longer than that for animals and started first, consequently the order is correct in putting it before animal life creation. Early plants (Hebrew deshe, eseb, and zera) provided an oxygen atmosphere making it possible for animal life. You are right that early animal life in the Cambrian Explosion came before fruit trees (Hebrew ets) existed by over a hundred million years, however, the fruit trees descended from earlier plant types listed prior in the verse and the author and God chose to put all kinds into the one verse as they are long descendent sequence. In any case, even if the order is different or misplaced,  it's not justification that plants and animals had to be instantaneously created from dust. It's not the order,  it is the methodology in question here.  The verses indicate that the earth and or the waters bring forth the plants in the animals. God said 'let' the earth or waters bring forth the plants and animals and they did! According to the verses, God didn't bring them forth or pop them into existence, He designed Nature to 'LET' the earth and waters do it for Him!  This is evolution under God's guidance. Please read these verses carefully; you have misinterpreted them or are blinded to God's Holy Word.  Satan be gone, let the YEs see, read, and understand!

Q3) This is another example where the YEs  have chosen to ignore a verse in GE 1 that is contrary to their ideology: GE 1:2 and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.  The point of reference has been ignored, to further other erroneous concepts the YEs perpetuate.  The Spirit of God is clearly over the water surface on the early planet earth.

Q4) We both agree that God could have molded  and brought plants and animals to life from clay, but that is not what He said He did in GE 1! Again, He 'let' the earth and waters do the work for Him and they 'brought' the plants and animals 'forth' by natural reproduction generation after generation, species by species.  My God is more than a magician, He cleverly designed Nature to assist Him in the Creation while providing Him complete authority over all things produced. Forcing this God designed natural creation machine to fill the world with  all plants and animals in six 24 hour days is a fiction from Satan and perpetuated by the YEs.

Q5) Amazing, we agree on this point!

Q6) But, the YEs are the ones guilty of the misrepresentation of God's Word relating to creation or not being able to clearly read and understand the Bible at least.  You should be warning other YEs and the ICR instead of the rest of us.

Q7) An old earth has nothing to do with the slippery slope humanity is on.  The slope is caused by non-belief in the one true God and our Savior,  people believing in BALONEY(etc.), and people putting themselves above others.  The ICR's and YEs time and resources would be much better invested in battling the above important issues rather than fighting the ancient age of the earth, and promoting non-biblical fictional instantaneous animal and plant popping!

Merry Christmas!

Lee
santa



Last edited by InfinitLee on Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:08 am; edited 5 times in total (Reason for editing : Missing Word, Italics, grammar, added link, additional point in Q1 response)

lordfry

lordfry

Creating the Straw Man Argument X7 ... !!!


Q1) Does the Bible expressly say it is less than 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! With verses like 2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day", there is no way to demand that the creation DAYS/EPOCHS in Genesis 1 are only 24 hours when God was creating the universe, earth and all of its plants and creatures. Quite the contrary, Peter tells us that their is no correlation between God's DAYS and human days.
REAL ANSWER!
2 Peter 3:8 is CLEARLY telling us that God is NOT subject to His creation of TIME !!!
God does not own a pocket watch ... nor a calendar ... as God is TIMELESS ... !!!
But let me put my brain in my back pocket for a minute so I can humor you!
Let's pretend that God means what He's saying here about a "Day" being a "Thousand" years!
7 days X 1000 years = 7000 years + 6000 years of recorded history = 13,000 years !!!
I can live with that! CAN YOU ???
Here! ... let me offer you up some more ZERO's (0's) ...
130,000 years, 1,300,000 years, 13,000,000 years, 130,000,000 years, & even 1,300,000,000 years!
Still is NOT enough time to fulfill the LIE that falsely inflates Darwin's MYTH ... !!!
Oddly enough ... you need to add SIX (6) ZEROS to match the myth!
Biblically ... the number SIX (6) is the number that represents fallen (incomplete) man!
Isn't it ironic that it takes (6) ZEROS added to God's Truth to fulfill man's incomplete theory!
When you trilogize this fallen number ... you get the god that is selling this LIE ... !!!



Q2) Does it exclude the possibility of God-guided evolution?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the wording in Genesis 1 describes God guided evolution and provides no evidence for popping or superpopping of all plants and animals into existence instantaneously. Other verses give strong evidence for God intervening in the natural evolutionary process and growing each individual plant or animal from its 'seed'. These Bible verses are pointed out in my previous posts too numerous to list here.
REAL ANSWER!
Let's ignore the exact time-frame for a moment and focus in on the "Order" of Creation vs. the "order" of Evolution!
The Bible says that TREES bearing FRUIT after their own kind existed BEFORE the Fish did ... and Chucky D. says NO ... !!!
The Bible says that BIRDS (fowl) existed before the land animals did ... and Dickey D. says NO ... !!!
I won't even bring up the Sun, Moon, & the Stars issue!


Q3) Does it exclude the possibility that Moses could have been viewing the creation event from the Earth's surface and reported what he saw (like most all the other prophets given prophecy)?
Answer- No! The words in the Bible (Ge 1:2) accurately describe the liquid water upper surface (the face of the deep, And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters) therefore giving us the reference point for what follows in the Ge 1 description of evolutionary events.
REAL ANSWER!
The teaching that Moses was shown a time-lapse Imax movie of the Creation Event is a concept taken right out of
"The Pearl of Great Price"
Wait! ... you can't find that book in your Bible?
You might need to consult with the Mormon Church on that one?
Either God was a really lousy film maker? ... or Moses just plan sucked at taking notes?



Q4) Does the Bible expressly say that God created things from nothing when it says something was created in Chapter one? (warning: requires a review of the original Hebrew words used in Gen 1)
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the words describe the earth and waters bringing forth plants and animals from their seed. This process requires time to grow each one to maturity from its seed. Studying the Hebrew further confirms this fact.
REAL ANSWERS!
In a RARE moment of unity ...
I think we would ALL agree that matter is NOT eternal ... and therefore needed to be created!
After God created Matter, Time, & Space OUT OF NOTHING! ...
I too believe that He dipped into this newly formed clay to mold whatever He wished ...
but my God can mold, fire, and animate his creations in less than a day!



Q5)Do we as Christians save more people by telling them they have to believe the Earth is under 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the secular world uses this point to mock Christians and convince others to not take Christianity or Creationism seriously.
REAL ANSWER!
>>> NO CHRISTIAN HAS EVER SAVED ANYONE PERIOD !!! <<<
The salvation is ours for the taking ... thanks to our Lord Jesus !!!
We are drawn to accept Jesus by the Power of the Holy Spirit !!!
No one can be tricked into the club ... or tricked out!
Trying to make God's Word conform with man's myths ...
is so "Roman Catholic Church" like ... don't you think?



Q6) And to reference Revelation 22:18, do we run the risk of adding to God's Word by forcing this interpretation.
Answer- Absolutely, Yes! This interpretation by the YEs goes against the words of prophet's and God's own statements on creation. Forcing people to accept a 24 hour God's DAY and the popping concept are clearly adding concepts that were never stated nor intended by the original authors of the Bible.
REAL ANSWER!
Are you freaking kidding me with this one?
Young Earthers are basically just Fundamentalists!
We fight AGAINST those of you that are hellbent on CHANGING, Distorting, & adding to the CLEAR
straight-up reading of God's Word ... !!!
Are you saying that it is wrong for me to point out God's WARNING about those who will choose to deceive?



Q7) "I am not sure how old the Earth is, but if you could believe the Earth is 4.5 to 5 Billion years old, would you give your life to Jesus Christ today and trust Him as your Lord and Savior?"
Answer- How old the earth is has no bearing on whether they give their life to Jesus Christ. Trust in Christianity is affected though when some groups, like the YEs, try to force the non-believers into accepting the world is less that 10,000 years old.
REAL ANSWER!
Changing the age of the Earth carries way more baggage with it than just adding SIX (0's) to it!
It's THE ultimate slippery slope that will open the door for the antichrist to deceive the world that he is god ... !!!
This is way more than a jot and tittle!





20Bret12™

24Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Dear Mr. Grinch Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:07 am

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Bret,
We are so very happy that you will be joining us for Christmas Festivus in WhoVille! Cindy Lu will be so excited. Max is welcome to join us too. Don't bring presents, just your presence is desired. We missed you, are you okay? I was worried that you OD'ed on propaganda or drank the Kool-Aid at a YE conference and we would never hear from you again. I am very happy to see you are alive and back to enjoy Christmas with us. Your title seems more like one of the lines from Poltergeist though. I hope your dialogue won't mirror demonic possession instead of the Christmas angel.

My link, by the way, works just fine if you sign in and use a computer with Windows! Iphone apps seem to have difficulty. Here is the path in case you don't: http://magazine.biola.edu/article/12-fall/what-the-god-particle-says-about-god/

As far as my assumptions go, they aren't. They are right from the Bible and the science is validated from decades of research. I would be most appreciative and grateful if you could find even just one flaw in any of my writings on the site. But in almost three years all I've seen is balderdash and baseless attacks from the YEs and a complete lack of Biblical support for their views. Rolling Eyes

So before you do something that you regret and go off hiding again, Mr. Grinch, it would be very nice to see a Biblical justification with good rationale from you. Since you believe popping large numbers of plants and animals from dust instanteously is the way God created in spite of all the verses to the contrary in Ge 1 and other chapters of the Bible which I have identified for you in my posts, it is high time to provide some, any, and all evidence from God's Holy Word. Give me anything you got! So far you got nuttin! I've only seen empty promises to deliver, time and time again. What will it be this time Mr. Grinch? Wink

Now I think I will go and watch 'Dr Seuss How The Grinch Stole Christmas' (the Jim Carrey version). I always enjoy watching it. Be thinking of you!

Lee rendeer



Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:16 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : grammar)

lordfry

lordfry

Yes ...


The Grinch is back to the Blog (at least periodically) to steal the "Happy" out of your Holidays ...
and to put THE "Christ" back into Christmas! (The Biblical one ... not the secular pseudo science one!)

But ... before I expose ALL of your flawed assumptions ... can you please fix your latest link to the Higgs article?
Maybe we have some common ground here? Might actually be nice if we could find "something" that we could agree upon? Smile

Happy Festivus! jocolor



>>> 20Bret12™️ <<<

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Recently we had a few posts on the significance or insignificance of the discovery of the 'God Particle' technically known as the Higgs Boson. Below is a link to an article written by Dr. William Lane Craig of Biola that this discovery if valid has no bearing on whether God exists or not. This article further validates the point I made at the time: it is a small piece of a bigger picture that is presently unknown and incomplete of how gravity and the standard particle model fit together. If anything, the discovery would add evidence for God's existence in that the particle is clearly not eternal and elusive or hidden like God. Please read the article below for a more complete perspective.

What The 'God Particle' Says About God

Lee rendeer



Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Misspelling)

27Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Well, I didn't expect you to care, Lee. Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:11 am

sumiala

sumiala

And unfortunately I was right.

28Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Lucien vs Lucian? Who cares? Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:40 am

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Lucien,
Just as I expected from you, ignore the important points (like endlessly dodging the justification of your YE position) and instead continuing to dwell on the petty. Why do you waste our time with your pointless babble?

Since you don't have any legitimate rational, it seems, to support your view of popping plants and animals in great numbers into existence, how about giving us your thoughts on how the fine tuned physical constants, the physical laws, and the chemistry they create provides design evidence for directed evolution. Is this too much for you?

Lee Rolling Eyes



Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Added comment)

29Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty another Biblical creationist! Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:05 am

sumiala

sumiala

Hey Bret


apparently there is another Biblical creationist on the forum, called Lucian.
Lee knew before we did!


Lucien

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

It must be scary for some to justify their Biblical position with logical and credible arguments. I'm still waiting for any of the YEs to come up with theirs. Please give me some insight here, Lucian, why you, or any other YE, is afraid to do this? Is it because you know you don't have a credible position?

Lee scratch Rolling Eyes

31Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Think you scared them away Lee! Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:16 pm

sumiala

sumiala

Wink

32Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Gaining Wisdom and Understanding Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:55 am

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Hi LangAmil,
Welcome to the discussion. It's great to hear from someone new on this topic. I would enjoy hearing your perspective on creation if you would like to spend the time documenting it for us: old earth/young earth, Darwinist/evolutionary creationist/ instantaneous creation of plants and animals.

Proverbs gives us lots of insight into gaining wisdom, understanding, and avoiding folly. Good science, based on testing our reality and world, has also been a important source of truth. Of course the Bible is a great source of spiritual and historical truth as well. Unfortunately, the Bible doesn't provide sufficient detail on creation to provide a clear and compelling case for any of the competing versions, by only gives a summary and somewhat historical account in Ge 1 and symbolic account of creation in Ge 2. Other prophets like Job, Peter and Jeremiah give additional piecemeal insights. These narratives by the authors throughout the Bible often mix symbolism and historical accounts together. God's words on creation are often very symbolic. The main source of truth about creation unfortunately comes from nature and its historical record.

Each reader gets their own limited perspective from the Biblical accounts and join forces with others sharing the same views. It is very difficult to make perfect sense of it all without a natural perspective. For me some of the views held by people and expressed on this blog are folly and inconsistent either with the Bible and/or nature/reality. The key, I believe, is to study both reality and the Bible and discover the common truth in both by diligent honest investigation. Some people totally ignore reality in their writings and I don't believe God finds that an acceptable position to base their beliefs and promote to others.

I hope you agree with me but if you don't I would like to hear your perspective on this.

Lee Very Happy

LangAmil



It is actually hard when we talk about religion and science, and there are a lot question sin our mind about how things happened, when and does what we know really what happened or is it really the truth? This is a never lasting debate, issues and questions to us people..

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

A number of years back, I read a book titled Nature's Destiny by Michael Denton which supported a theory that the characteristics of the cosmos, the environments found on earth, the properties of light as well as the elements and molecules drive (or evolve) the form and function of all species in very precise directions because of their very unique and optimal characteristics. Basically the theory is that the physical laws and initial conditions in the universe were precisely tuned at the time of creation to drive creation to a very exacting developmental path that conforms to the characteristics of matter and environmental conditions on earth that these laws and initial conditions produced. This concept was not new but the author brought the topic up to date in his book with recent findings and excellent supporting data.  There is such extensive evidence for the theory that has been discovered through scientific investigation, a second reading of the book was called for.  

This topic has great relevance to the evolution/creation debate and deserves to be addressed here.  The point of the theory is that life's evolution, whether the Darwinian or God guided variety, is directed greatly by the characteristics of the atoms, their combination into molecules, and the interactions with light, electrons, and physical forces encountered near the earth's surface where very special temperatures and pressures exist.  These  properties were set at the very beginning of the universe as fixed laws of nature and have forced simple and complex life forms to develop along a predetermined path which is compatible with these atomic/molecular properties that enhance natural selection and/or unfold to meet God's predetermined plan.  The argument is made by the many examples of unique molecules and elements that have just the right characteristics to support life and permit the earth to have life sustaining environments for billions of years.  After extensive study and experiment, scientists have found that there are no other elements or molecules that can take their place or even come close to their existing optimal qualities that support life. This is a strong argument in favor of design.  The argument is further strengthened by the number of unique molecules which interact in just the right way to allow large  plants and air breathing life forms to exist. There is no credible evidence produced thus far that these atomic properties had to be this way based on a Grand Unification principle.  On the contrary, the natural constants in combination with the physical laws have the appearance of being specially tuned by our Creator to support life.  Even the slightest variation in many of them would produce a lifeless universe.  The set of physical laws and natural constants testify and make a overwhelming case for design which guided evolution toward large multicellular life forms. There is additional evidence that these characteristics aided in the development of anthropic life forms, or at a minimum, at least a strong case that nature was designed to be capable of supporting large air breathing mammals. 

For example, water is now thought to be essential for life by most scientists due to its unique properties. Among these are its very low viscosity, unique thermal properities, and its alcahest like properties which allow most other molecules and elements to dissolve into it. Searches for life in the cosmos, now focus on planets where water is thought to exist because of these unique properties.

Carbon Dioxide is another molecule with unique properties. It diffuses and dissolves readily in the atmosphere and water, is a waste product of energy utilization, is a fuel source for photosynthesis and provides its own buffer to reduce acidity while in solution. Extensive plant life could not exist without this molecule as no other fuel source makes itself so readily available in the biosphere. No high rates of metabolism, such as in animals, could exist either. The key waste product of cellular metabolism, carbon dioxide, easily dissolves in water, is transported to our lungs, and is efficiently diffused into the air as we take in more oxygen in each breath. We produce about two pounds of this gas each day as a waste product and hardly notice its existence and elimination in each breath as we rush around town thinking of all the activities we must complete before we sleep. The fact that it is a food for plants and a waste product for animals permits carbon recycling. This permits the earth's largest food chain to be solar powered for billions of years.

After extensive study, iron seems to be the only element that can manage the oxygen transport safely and efficiently from the lungs to the cells. When incorporated into the compound heme used in hemoglobin, it can increase the amount of oxygen density in the blood about 50 times than oxygen dissolved in solution without hemaglobin. Also, iron is essential for the survival of all life on our planet's surface. Without it in our planet's interior, there would be no magnetic field to protect life from the damaging particles from outer space and the erosion of the atmosphere from the solar wind into outer space. Iron and other heavy metals are also essential for our human technologies, tools, comfort, and protection. It is essential for large active animals since it is the only element that can support high levels of oxygen transport efficiently to large multi-cellular life forms necessary for high rate metabolism.

Besides iron, several of the metals give every indication that their properties were designed to perform a very special predetermined biological role in life. Magnesium has very high light absorption characteristics uniquely suitable for photosynthesis. Molybdenum is utilized in both the proteins nitrogenase and nitrate reductase both involved in nitrogen fixation. All nitrogen used by living things is intially captured by reactions involving these two enzymes. Calcium is another metal that is unique in its ability to work with proteins for the rapid conveyance of information within the cell. Because of its low weight it rapidly moves within the cell, but also because of its great binding strength to proteins relative to other light metals such as magnesium, it can be tightly controlled in large volume. The element is necessary for muscle contraction, nerve impulses, hormone release, etc.

The molecules DNA, RNA, and their assistant proteins also are uniquely fit for their roles as the subunits for advanced life forms on this planet. Studies have shown that no other molecules come close to their efficiency in packing density of information, their ability to store, retrieve, and handle this information efficiency. For DNA, the strength and internal positioning of bonds is just right to not only permit long term storage of complex information within the cell, but precisely the right shape to match that of the attendant protein shape for the efficient retrieval of the information to conduct cellular activies. Without these molecules, no cells would be possible. No cells, no life.

The bi-lipid layer consisting, seems to also be unique in its role. Lipids are hydrophobic at one end and hydrophilic at the other. When combined into a bi-lipid layer it automatically forms into a sheet in water that forms a boundary for cellular protoplasm. Its characteristics are ideal for this function: ideal viscoscity, just right bonding strength to support multicellular life, electrical insulation with just right characteristics to support nerve impulses between cells, and just right characteristics for crawling during multicellular development.

In the early 1950s, John Von Neumann envisioned an extremely advanced machine capable of self replication. Based on what we know today about the cell it puts to shame the vision of the automaton put forth by Von Neuman. The cell contains tens of thousands of types of protein nano-machines (NM), NM making other NM, NM constantly rebuilding the factory (cell), NM duplicating the factory, NM reading blueprints from the central archive library (DNA), and NM tugging and guiding shipments of raw material around within the cell. The cell seems to be the perfect example of the automaton, as a molecular machine it has been able to support all of life's many forms and functions over the history of the earth. In fact it also had the ability to diversify through the modification of its internal information into many types of life forms including plants, trees, bacterial cells, amoeba, sponges, and human beings. Always consisting of virtually the same materials but different information in each of its forms. Through it all, the elements and molecules described above plus others that were designed from the beginning worked suitably and optimally within all of life's many versions.

Just based on the limited scope of the above, there is strong evidence of design at the heart of creation that guided all forms to be compatible with the environments, elements and molecules. All the species are molded to conform to the character of our matter and habitats produced by the natural laws and are found only here on earth on its surface and in its oceans. These special characteristics present themselves in a very limited temperature and pressure range almost non-existant anywhere else in the cosmos. This further guides the development process making it extremely unlikely that advanced complex intelligent life forms could exist anywhere else besides a mirror earth-like planet. But if one did exist the author of Nature's Destiny believed, its intelligent inhabitants would likely be land based oxygen breathing carbon based life forms with very similar metabolisms and look very similar to us. He may or may not be correct on this last assumption. The degree of divergence from this view seems rather contingent on the environmental characteristics of the planet: such as land area, particular temperature range, timing of E.L.E (extermination) events, solar stability, orbital characterists, etc.

It is a safe bet, however, that the physical laws do have a profound effect on the way that life operates and the elements and molecules that are used. We can see that all life forms utilized the same biological processes and they all take advantage of the unique and optimal characteristics of the elements, molecules and habitats available here. Even if life forms were popped into existance instantaneously by our Creator as the young earthers believe, it is a safe bet that they were designed to be compatible with the physical laws, otherwise, these kinds wouldn't function well and would quickly be unselected by the other varieties competing with them for food and space. If you are of the other persuasion, believing that life developed slowly in stages through Darwinian evolution, it is also the same safe bet that beneficial changes had to align with these special elements, molecules, and environments to survive the natural selection process. Either way, physical laws and the environment tightly control the form, fit, and function of the many life forms.

What is truly amazing is that all of the properties of the elements and molecules can be derived from just four physical constants and a few quantum mechanical rules such as the Pauli exclusion principle, electron orbits must be integer deBroglie wavelengths, and each electron must have only one of two values. The physical constants are the speed of light (c), Planck's constant, electric charge (e), and the mass ratios between the proton and electron. From these all the chemical characteristics can be determined. Although a sensitivity analysis of chemical properties for the above special molecules has never been performed to my knowledge, we can confidently predict that the fundamental constants in physics must have been extremely fine tuned to many decimal places right from the beginning to give the elements and molecules their precise values that permit life and especially large mammals including human beings capable of abstract thought. What an amazing design!

Praise God for His special insight in creating the physical laws and conditions on earth. It all came together here so that we can enjoy a drink of fresh water, a deep breath of fresh air, food on our tables, and shelter from our enemies. Please let me know if anyone finds another place in the cosmos (or another cosmos for that matter) where this is all possible!
Lee
sunny



Last edited by InfinitLee on Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:05 am; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : typo, misspelling, grammar, clarification, added point on physical constants)

35Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Reunion Revival Response Sat Sep 01, 2012 2:01 am

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

We needed some fresh thoughtful input. Thanks Dave! We love you too! Not sure why he didn't, but since Bret didn't respond to Dave's questions, I thought I would to try and resuscitate the discussion. I hope Dave will join in again soon! I hope others will join in as well.

Q1) Does the Bible expressly say it is less than 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! With verses like 2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day", there is no way to demand that the creation DAYS/EPOCHS in Genesis 1 are only 24 hours when God was creating the universe, earth and all of its plants and creatures. Quite the contrary, Peter tells us that their is no correlation between God's DAYS and human days.


Q2) Does it exclude the possibility of God-guided evolution?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the wording in Genesis 1 describes God guided evolution and provides no evidence for popping or superpopping of all plants and animals into existence instantaneously. Other verses give strong evidence for God intervening in the natural evolutionary process and growing each individual plant or animal from its 'seed'. These Bible verses are pointed out in my previous posts too numerous to list here.

Q3) Does it exclude the possibility that Moses could have been viewing the creation event from the Earth's surface and reported what he saw (like most all the other prophets given prophecy)?
Answer- No! The words in the Bible (Ge 1:2) accurately describe the liquid water upper surface (the face of the deep, And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters) therefore giving us the reference point for what follows in the Ge 1 description of evolutionary events.

Q4) Does the Bible expressly say that God created things from nothing when it says something was created in Chapter one? (warning: requires a review of the original Hebrew words used in Gen 1)
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the words describe the earth and waters bringing forth plants and animals from their seed. This process requires time to grow each one to maturity from its seed. Studying the Hebrew further confirms this fact.

Q5)Do we as Christians save more people by telling them they have to believe the Earth is under 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the secular world uses this point to mock Christians and convince others to not take Christianity or Creationism seriously.


Q6) And to reference Revelation 22:18, do we run the risk of adding to God's Word by forcing this interpretation.
Answer- Absolutely, Yes! This interpretation by the YEs goes against the words of prophet's and God's own statements on creation. Forcing people to accept a 24 hour God's DAY and the popping concept are clearly adding concepts that were never stated nor intended by the original authors of the Bible.

Q7) "I am not sure how old the Earth is, but if you could believe the Earth is 4.5 to 5 Billion years old, would you give your life to Jesus Christ today and trust Him as your Lord and Savior?"
Answer- How old the earth is has no bearing on whether they give their life to Jesus Christ. Trust in Christianity is affected though when some groups, like the YEs, try to force the non-believers into accepting the world is less that 10,000 years old.

Lee sunny



Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:41 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Added Title, typo error)

lordfry

lordfry

Thanks Dave!

I'm sure they will resurface just like a bad simplex of Herpes!
But ... being able to pop these pimples from re-posting using the same member ID
does have a certain amount pleasure and satisfaction attached to it! cheers
I guess (in a weird way)... that attracting enough attention to be Spammed ...
is kind of a compliment about our dedication to keeping this Topic relevant? sunny



2012Bret*

37Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty So Has Everyone Figured it Out? Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:57 am

Admin


Admin

I just thought I would pop by the forum after finding a rather urgent message Bret wrote a long time ago...

So let me jump in here...

Does the Bible expressly say it is less than 10,000 years old?
Does it exclude the possibility of God-guided evolution?
Does it exclude the possibility that Moses could have been viewing the creation event from the Earth's surface and reported what he saw (like most all the other prophets given prophecy)?
Does the Bible expressly say that God created things from nothing when it says something was created in Chapter one? (warning: requires a review of the original Hebrew words used in Gen 1)

Do we as Christians save more people by telling them they have to believe the Earth is under 10,000 years old? And to reference Revelation 22:18, do we run the risk of adding to God's Word by forcing this interpretation.

As most of you know, I lean Old Earth, and believe it to be so because I have found little direct evidence that God said it was young. However, my official answer is, I don't know, but it seems to be old.

The best follow up question to someone who thinks it is old and has a problem with a young earth:

"I am not sure how old the Earth is, but if you could believe the Earth is 4.5 to 5 Billion years old, would you give your life to Jesus Christ today and trust Him as your Lord and Savior?"

I love all of you and hope everyone still enjoys the discussions fostered by this blog.

In Christ,

Dave Cristofaro

https://earthage.forumotion.com

38Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 2 Empty Balonium (aka The God Particle) Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:28 am

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Lucien,
That was very funny!  I really mean that, I got a good laugh from it.  Your assessment is correct that the imaginary discovery of nothing and naming it Balonium has nothing to do with the debate on evolution.  It is a nice play on words though and was very enjoyable.   

In a way, the discovery of the God or Goddamn Particle, as some call it, is much like Balonium.  The discovery seems more like wishful thinking from the Godless atheists  and subset of particle scientists to complete their standard model theory without integrating a theory of gravity or extra dimensionality than any real solid evidence for a new Higgs particle (balonium).  

There is plenty of real scientific and Biblical evidence for God guided evolution though.  I am still waiting for the ICR or any of their many followers to provide any real natural or Biblical evidence for 1) 24 hour God DAYS, or 2) God or nature popping animals into existence instantaneously.  So far I have only received Balonium.  

Lee lol!

sumiala

sumiala

NEW ELEMENT, BALONIUM, CONFIRMS EVOLUTION IS TRUE


April 1, 2012 – Scientists have discovered a new element that confirms the theory of evolution to be true. The new element – balonium – will be added to the Periodic Table of Elements with an atomic number of zero because it has no protons, no neutrons, no electrons and no evidence that it even exists.

At a press conference this morning, scientists announced that balonium can travel faster than the speed of light. This is because balonium has no protons, neutrons or electrons, so it is, in fact, nothing. And as everyone knows, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

When asked if balonium is a radioactive element, scientists said, "Yes, balonium has a half-life of one day. Of course, no one is certain if the day is 24 hours or if it's a thousand years [or many eons of time]. We should know something by tomorrow."

In its natural state, balonium is reddish-pink in color, similar to bologna – hence, the element's name. When asked what balonium has to do with evolution, former creationist Ian Taylor said, "The discovery of balonium changes everything in the debate over evolution and biblical creation." The host of the Creation Moments radio program explained, "Since balonium is literally nothing, we now have indisputable scientific evidence that nothing confirms evolution to be true."

InfinitLee

InfinitLee

Bret,

I actually agree with some of what you have said about the God Particle claims made recently. Here is another article that I think you will find entertaining and somewhat in agreement with your view on the unsubstantiated hype: if-you-want-more-higgs-hype-dont-read-this-column. This article is more substantive than your view however and makes specific counterpoints regarding the hype and false claims. Since science was established by God centuries ago by creating humans and providing guidance by saying 'test everything', contrary to your hype and bluster, the end of science is not at all at hand.

There is a great lesson to be learned (slowly) by many regarding jumping to conclusions which support their fundamental beliefs without much evidence. It seems to apply here as well! Since the Bible contradicts your view of popping animals and plants into existence from several perspectives and I've pointed out the verses many times over without a serious attempt on the part of the YEs to explain or rationalize these conflicts, shouldn't the YEs admit that they might be wrong about their concept of popping and super popping. The YEs must also be heavily invested as well by many millions of dollars in their facilities and staff that claim this phony popping is the truth. They (the ICR and other organizations) seem to be ignoring reality and the verses in the Bible that refutes their case as well in the interest of saving face, money and power! How about being a good Christian and admit it when you are wrong! Ge 1 clearly describes God guided evolution and not popping or superpopping. Better luck next time in choosing the right side for a debate!

Lee study



Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:01 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Added link and comment, grammar)

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 9]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum