Romans 1:18-20 (NIV)
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
(you can check other translations, they say the same basic thing)
I personally find that to be an awesome scripture because it deals with creation vs. evolution and how even though true science beats the evolution theory with scientific fact and reasoning they still deny it and wont accept that evolution is wrong.
Lets pretend that creation is wrong and evolution was right... (big emphasis on the pretend part)
how on earth did the bombardier beetle ever evolve? because the second he starts to "evolve" and create those chemicals to make the explosion he is dead because they mix in his body and he blows up... or what about the eye ball? how did that evolve? did it evolve from some sort of "simple eye" or maybe it was simply created. what about bears, they hibernate for 7 months and only loose like 10 or 15 % of their strength, where if humans did that we would loose nearly 90% of our strength. or even the giraffe, the heart of a giraffe has to be really powerful in order to pump blood up to its head, but what about when it bends over to get a drink? if it didn't have those little valves in its neck it would blow its brains up from the blood pressure... these are just a few of animals that proves there is no way they could "just evolve" from some puddle of goo.
So if you can explain to me how one can believe in both evolution and and the bible (being the inspired word of god) then please do because I would like to know, but until then I will believe the bible over what the retarded public school system teaches about evolution (which is plain as day wrong).
Evolution vs. Creation
Well you keep asking for evidence and Ive seen people show you great pieces of evidence but you keep trying to twist it so that your not wrong in your faith. So I'm asking you, show me evidence that proves evaluation is right. give me evidence that proves creation or the flood never happened. not just one, multiple, like we have given you.
No, because I believe in the bible and that it was talking about literal days when god made the earth.
What about the earths rotation slowing down?
or the sun decreasing in size?
If my small amount of scientific knowledge is correct that would mean that either those have been an ongoing thing since the beginning or something triggered those things.
If something triggered such a substantial reaction like that there would be evidence of such things (like monkeys tuning in to humans.... where is the evidence?).
So if the earth and sun have been doing those things since the beginning then how is it that the sun didn't fry the earth "40 billion" years ago?
or how is it that the earth didn't throw everything off of it spinning that fast?
Do you belive that the bible is the inspired word of god?
What about the earths rotation slowing down?
or the sun decreasing in size?
If my small amount of scientific knowledge is correct that would mean that either those have been an ongoing thing since the beginning or something triggered those things.
If something triggered such a substantial reaction like that there would be evidence of such things (like monkeys tuning in to humans.... where is the evidence?).
So if the earth and sun have been doing those things since the beginning then how is it that the sun didn't fry the earth "40 billion" years ago?
or how is it that the earth didn't throw everything off of it spinning that fast?
Do you belive that the bible is the inspired word of god?
Believe what you want. You are, quite simply, wrong. Your "small amount of scientific knowledge" is clearly that---small.
1. The evidence is that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and the universe much older.
2. "Monkeys turning into humans"? Who told you that? You just illustrate your total lack of understanding of science.
3. Gott some citation to the earth's rotation slowing down? to the sun decreasing in size? Real scientific citations? Please give them to me.
4. The sun did not "fry the earth 40 billion years ago" well cause, neither of them were around 40 billion years ago.
5. The earth threw everything off "spinning that fast". What are you talking about?
How old are you? Do you go to school?
1. The evidence is that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and the universe much older.
2. "Monkeys turning into humans"? Who told you that? You just illustrate your total lack of understanding of science.
3. Gott some citation to the earth's rotation slowing down? to the sun decreasing in size? Real scientific citations? Please give them to me.
4. The sun did not "fry the earth 40 billion years ago" well cause, neither of them were around 40 billion years ago.
5. The earth threw everything off "spinning that fast". What are you talking about?
How old are you? Do you go to school?
-
Skepti Que
- Member
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:57 pm
- Location: California, USA
Wow, some action here. I'd about given up.
Brian H. quotes from the New Improved Version:
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Brian H., I know some very godly people who think an evolutionary process is what God used to make the universe and the creatures on earth. They are not godless nor wicked. In fact they are paragons of faith and righteousness. Though I do not know Jukia I think Jukia falls into a category like this.
I think Jukia is not suppressing truth by wickedness.
No matter what process God used to make the heavens and the earth or how long He took to do it does not His creation, does not the creation manifest His nature?
I think the passage you cite does not speak to, for, against or about evolution. It is about God and His relationship to man and man's response.
Now Jukia,
If you believe the Bible is God's inspired word I have some questions for you and I have no agenda in these. This is out of curiousity only.
When does the Biblical account become literal and historica?
Was Abraham real a real person? Did the Hebrew nation spring from him?
How about Moses? Was there a real exodus from Egypt? Ten pagues?
How about David? Was there really a king by that name in Jerusalem?
How about Jesus? Did He live and die and was He raised?
As always, I remain, Skepti Que
Brian H. quotes from the New Improved Version:
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Brian H., I know some very godly people who think an evolutionary process is what God used to make the universe and the creatures on earth. They are not godless nor wicked. In fact they are paragons of faith and righteousness. Though I do not know Jukia I think Jukia falls into a category like this.
I think Jukia is not suppressing truth by wickedness.
No matter what process God used to make the heavens and the earth or how long He took to do it does not His creation, does not the creation manifest His nature?
I think the passage you cite does not speak to, for, against or about evolution. It is about God and His relationship to man and man's response.
Now Jukia,
If you believe the Bible is God's inspired word I have some questions for you and I have no agenda in these. This is out of curiousity only.
When does the Biblical account become literal and historica?
Was Abraham real a real person? Did the Hebrew nation spring from him?
How about Moses? Was there a real exodus from Egypt? Ten pagues?
How about David? Was there really a king by that name in Jerusalem?
How about Jesus? Did He live and die and was He raised?
As always, I remain, Skepti Que
And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning?the first day
Genesis 1:3-5 (New International Version)
It explains the light = day and darkness = night then in the fallowing sentence it says evening and morning, which to me that seems pretty obvious that it was a literal day.
And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.
Genesis 1:14 and 15
why would they be jumping from literal days to figurative days?
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:25
Now to me that seems like god said it and it was, no millions of years to happen. What reason would he have to delay it for millions of years?
And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning?the second day.
Genesis 1:6-8
Now I don't know if its just me but that seems a lot like some kind of protective canopy that John Nay has talked about or reffed to and could be a possible explanation for ohhh maybe how the flood happend. and if the flood was true then the petrified forests would have an explanation, all the oil that we find could be a possible result as well, so I don't know, I guess you can just call me gullible when it comes to reading the bible.
Now I would have to say that the bible gives enough reason to believe that creation is what happened and that Darwin was just blowing smoke when he made up that stupid story about evaluation. and from Adam you can trace the age of the earth to the flood, and in the book of John it gives the genealogy of Christ from Abraham. so unless there was a 4.4 billion year gap in between the flood and Abraham then I don't believe that the earth could possibly be 4.5 billion years old.
And just because im still in school dosent mean that I dont know anything. I Belive the bible whole heartedly as the only way so unless you can show me scripture in which it shows that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then I will always belive my vew (I know it sounds suborn but god is the only one that is without mistake so I'm not going to be one to question or tweak his word).
Genesis 1:3-5 (New International Version)
It explains the light = day and darkness = night then in the fallowing sentence it says evening and morning, which to me that seems pretty obvious that it was a literal day.
And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.
Genesis 1:14 and 15
why would they be jumping from literal days to figurative days?
God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:25
Now to me that seems like god said it and it was, no millions of years to happen. What reason would he have to delay it for millions of years?
And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning?the second day.
Genesis 1:6-8
Now I don't know if its just me but that seems a lot like some kind of protective canopy that John Nay has talked about or reffed to and could be a possible explanation for ohhh maybe how the flood happend. and if the flood was true then the petrified forests would have an explanation, all the oil that we find could be a possible result as well, so I don't know, I guess you can just call me gullible when it comes to reading the bible.
Now I would have to say that the bible gives enough reason to believe that creation is what happened and that Darwin was just blowing smoke when he made up that stupid story about evaluation. and from Adam you can trace the age of the earth to the flood, and in the book of John it gives the genealogy of Christ from Abraham. so unless there was a 4.4 billion year gap in between the flood and Abraham then I don't believe that the earth could possibly be 4.5 billion years old.
And just because im still in school dosent mean that I dont know anything. I Belive the bible whole heartedly as the only way so unless you can show me scripture in which it shows that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then I will always belive my vew (I know it sounds suborn but god is the only one that is without mistake so I'm not going to be one to question or tweak his word).
Skeptic: Really jammed this am so no long answer. But ans to last question is, Yes I believe Jesus was a real person, died and rose etc.
When does Bible change to historically accurate--not sure but I am convinced that what science tells us about the age of the earth is correct, the Bible is not meant to be a science book. It tells the story of God's relationship with man.
Brian: You really need to take a look at the science. Radiometric dating of rocks shows the earth to be 4.5 billion years old. Darwin did not make things up. He looked at the world around him and tried to figure things out. Discoveries in genetics and molecular biology since Darwin have provided more clues to the mechanism of evolution. The scientists use the brains God gave them to explore the world.
When does Bible change to historically accurate--not sure but I am convinced that what science tells us about the age of the earth is correct, the Bible is not meant to be a science book. It tells the story of God's relationship with man.
Brian: You really need to take a look at the science. Radiometric dating of rocks shows the earth to be 4.5 billion years old. Darwin did not make things up. He looked at the world around him and tried to figure things out. Discoveries in genetics and molecular biology since Darwin have provided more clues to the mechanism of evolution. The scientists use the brains God gave them to explore the world.
Well how can you believe that?
God is perfect and we are not, so why would God put something incorrect/imperfect in to the bible?
By us being human (not god) we are susceptible to error so I will believe gods word over anything any human ever tells me.
I see that this conversation is going nowhere so god bless
God is perfect and we are not, so why would God put something incorrect/imperfect in to the bible?
By us being human (not god) we are susceptible to error so I will believe gods word over anything any human ever tells me.
I see that this conversation is going nowhere so god bless
-
Skepti Que
- Member
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2003 9:57 pm
- Location: California, USA
A while back I posted in the General Creation Science Forum, I believe it's called, an introduction and links, pro and con and to the actual article, about the six or seven days of revelation theory. It has been opened 25 times and a few of those have been by me. I just cleaned up some dead links. Noone has responeded to that post. It isn't really that difficult a read. I think anyone with a high school education could read and understand it. Why don't you read and meditate on that article then read and meditate on the links within it to get a balanced view and then let's discuss the possibilities.
Brian, I used to think much like you must think. The more I study and think about it the more I am convinced that God made the universe in a lot of what we call time. Or made it a long time ago. He is still active in His creation, in Him all things consist. From time to time He has intervened in His creation. We call those interventions miracles. The first miracle was creation.
Jesus is God's Son, He died and rose and will return. He is my Saviour and for Him I live and work; though I don't make my living at His work, He is my life.
I challenge you to read the scientific literature not merely things about the literature and read your Bible and come up with your own understanding.
Is the science wrong? Yes sometimes it is but the nature of science is self correcting. Is there a vast scientific conspiracy against truth?
Is the Bible true? Absolutely!
Is the Bible inspired? Every word?
Is science wrong? Maybe, sometimes. Interesting, is it not, that we trust the scientific fields of medicine, physics, electronics, chemistry, aerodynamics and aviation and then say those evolutionary biologists and others got it all wrong?
Is all truth God's truth?
Brian, I used to think much like you must think. The more I study and think about it the more I am convinced that God made the universe in a lot of what we call time. Or made it a long time ago. He is still active in His creation, in Him all things consist. From time to time He has intervened in His creation. We call those interventions miracles. The first miracle was creation.
Jesus is God's Son, He died and rose and will return. He is my Saviour and for Him I live and work; though I don't make my living at His work, He is my life.
I challenge you to read the scientific literature not merely things about the literature and read your Bible and come up with your own understanding.
Is the science wrong? Yes sometimes it is but the nature of science is self correcting. Is there a vast scientific conspiracy against truth?
Is the Bible true? Absolutely!
Is the Bible inspired? Every word?
Is science wrong? Maybe, sometimes. Interesting, is it not, that we trust the scientific fields of medicine, physics, electronics, chemistry, aerodynamics and aviation and then say those evolutionary biologists and others got it all wrong?
Is all truth God's truth?
