Changes

1,285 bytes added ,  01:02, July 7, 2007
→‎YEC v. OEC: On how old the Earth "looks", mainly
Line 79: Line 79:  
::::It just seems like a rather shaky way to interpret the Bible, is all. Genesis can be true without being literal, and you don't have to fight against all of this seemingly contrary evidence. If He could make the universe however he wanted, why would God have made it to look like something other than what He has layed down in the Bible? You may dissagree with conclusions of traditional scientists, but you can't deny that it sure looks like the earth is billions of years old, and God would have known this when he layed down the scripture. It does explain why people try so hard to compare 21st century science to a 10th century BC unattributed doccupment.
 
::::It just seems like a rather shaky way to interpret the Bible, is all. Genesis can be true without being literal, and you don't have to fight against all of this seemingly contrary evidence. If He could make the universe however he wanted, why would God have made it to look like something other than what He has layed down in the Bible? You may dissagree with conclusions of traditional scientists, but you can't deny that it sure looks like the earth is billions of years old, and God would have known this when he layed down the scripture. It does explain why people try so hard to compare 21st century science to a 10th century BC unattributed doccupment.
 
::::And all of this really goes back to TheisticEvolution's question: who cares? Must you declare your belief in a young earth before you ask God to redeem your sins? Can you go to heaven if you believe the scientific explanation of creation? In the scheme of things this is the much more important question, and the one that gets overlooked because of all the disagreement over the rest. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 15:41, 6 July 2007 (EDT)
 
::::And all of this really goes back to TheisticEvolution's question: who cares? Must you declare your belief in a young earth before you ask God to redeem your sins? Can you go to heaven if you believe the scientific explanation of creation? In the scheme of things this is the much more important question, and the one that gets overlooked because of all the disagreement over the rest. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 15:41, 6 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
:::::How can Genesis "be true without being literal" when it is making truth-claims?
 +
:::::And what makes you think that the universe looks as old as you think it is?  I have seen old people and I've seen young people, and I've seen young people grow old.  So if I see a person who's age I don't know, I can compare then to ones that I do know and get at least some idea of their age.  And I could say the same for trains, houses, appliances, and almost anything that you like to name.  However, I have ''not'' seen young earths and old earths and young earths growing old, so I don't have any such yardstick to compare this Earth against.  Therefore, I am not in a position to say that it "looks" old, and I suggest that neither are you.  Additionally, until the advent of the assumption of uniformitarianism around 200 years ago, virtually nobody thought that the world looked "old" (as in millions of years or more).  The idea that it looks "old" has only come about since the idea that it is old has been promoted, not because of looks.  So contrary to your claim, I ''can'' deny that it "looks like the earth is billions of years old".
 +
:::::The Bible is not unattributed, and not all from the 10th century BC.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:02, 6 July 2007 (EDT)
    
First of all, Mr. Jazzman, I shall ask you to produce your "seemingly contrary evidence"--more on that word ''seemingly'' later on. I ask this to challenge you. But I am not challenging you to fight. I am merely challenging you to think, and think ''hard'', about the quality of what you take to be the evidence contrary to a young earth.
 
First of all, Mr. Jazzman, I shall ask you to produce your "seemingly contrary evidence"--more on that word ''seemingly'' later on. I ask this to challenge you. But I am not challenging you to fight. I am merely challenging you to think, and think ''hard'', about the quality of what you take to be the evidence contrary to a young earth.
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits