Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by elsielover, Jan 4, 2013.
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
That article was very well written. I especially like:
"Let us consider, for example, supernovae. These are events that are occurring all over the universe, on average about once per galaxy per century. Lets say God created a star in the Andromeda galaxy 6,000 years ago. The star was created mature, near the end of its life (for the sake of argument, lets grant creationists that premise), and so it quickly goes supernova. The light from that event would still take about 2 million years to reach the earth. The only way we can see a supernova in Andromeda is if that event took place 2 million years ago.
If creationists are now going to rescue their concept of a young universe with the argument of created history they have a serious logical problem on their hands. This would mean that God, for some reason, not only created light from existing stars all along its path to the earth, but imbued that light with a fake history of that star, including all the things that would have happened to that light if it actually had been traveling along that path for millions or billions of years. This includes being bent by gravity and absorbed in gas clouds.
God also must have created streams of light from fake stars that never existed, to create the illusion that such a star did exist but went supernova millions or billions of years ago."
It's not so much that creationists manage to explain away things like ancient starlight, it's that they do it in such a grand variety of ways, from white hole cosmology to tired light to Riemannian geometry to localized gravity lenses, etc. Then, when any of these explanations are shown to fail under observation, rather than accepting the mainstream scientific explanation, they move on to a new explanation which can be shoehorned into agreeing with the Biblical chronology they've constructed.
Science and God do no have to exclude one another but most religious folks are far to caught up in it all (dumb) to realize that.
How anyone can look around them in their everyday life and think that what they see is simply the result of an explosion is beyond me. Look at all of the different ways living things reproduce, for example. There is no way that all happened randomly. It's probably pointless to even write this, because some folks will never be convinced one way or another. I fall squarely in the intelligent design camp, and do not exclude scientific theories as the means used by God to put us here.
If you fall into the intelligent design camp, you do exclude science.
How anyone can come up with that is beyond me. I've heard it said that the different ways living things reproduce proves that it happened randomly, but any rational person understands that it was all created by a team of gods, not only one, otherwise all reproduction would be the same - or, at least similar, if you throw in evolution.
How anyone can look around them in their everyday life and think that what they see is so simple they can udnerstand it without making any effort to learn the science behind it and that they can get a true answer because some ancient people, without even our most basic level of education, wrote it in a book, with no supporting evidence, is beyond me.
Did you ever read any of the other dozens or hundreds of stories they wrote about where all of this came from? The backs of turtles and horns of bulls and dung beetles and climbing up blades of grass from the last world and such? They have equal evidence and are equally likely - are they all true or just, coincidentally, the one your parents/community believed when and where you were born? Is it a popularity contest? Whatever religion gets the most people gets to decide how the world got here...until another religion gets more people and the "truth" changes?
I know of no one that believes the universe is simply the result of an explosion or happened at random. Only people I ever encountered professing such are religious folks misrepresenting, if not out right lying about how science describes existence.
For laws to be, there has to be a law giver. Also I would like anyone to show me in the Bible that the universe is young?
I can prove as much proof as you need from the Bible that the universe is infact NOT young.
Comprehending geological time is nearly impossible for most everyone, making it impossible for some to allow for or embrace those processes that require that time.
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
When accepted science cannot be squared with religious beliefs, it is time to:
a. bury your head in the sand
b. make even more absurd and illogical arguments to support your position
c. pretend like you are not capable of understanding "science"
d. just say that God did it, and he can violate the laws of science if he wants to
e. all of the above
Here's a short list of things that are beyond me and my ability or willingness to understand,
Getting 64 gb of data onto a micro SD card the size of 1/4 of a postage stamp.
Building a robot and having it control it's own reentry, decent and landing on a planet 150 million miles away and then proceed to send back useful images and chemical analysis data on the soil there.
Building a 4 mile long particle accelerator underground along with all the reasons why one would want to do that and what they might be looking for and what it means once that thing has been found.
Yet there sits the card in my tablet happily transferring it's data back and forth with other chips, and there rolls the Mars rover after a ridiculously complex automated landing sequence and there comes the data from CERN about particles all around us that no one previously knew about despite my inability to understand much of it at all.
But I could be a cave man and have trouble grasping the concept of an electric screwdriver. It makes no difference the who or the what. Your inability or unwillingness to understand has no bearing on what is truth or not and to suggest so indicates a hubris and narcissism that only religion could breed.
Science is your key to understanding that which you can't currently fathom. If you're having trouble understanding something then you might try embracing science rather than rejecting it.
Genesis describes a 6 day creation with Adam and Eve being created on the 6th day.
Luke chapter 3 verses 23-38 describes 76 generations from Adam to Jesus inclusive.
That suggests a very young earth. And if a day does not mean a day than what good is a reference that does not clearly state what it means?
But we are discussing the book that had Balaam's donkey talking to him in Numbers chapter 22. Claims of talking donkeys don't sound credible to me although I did enjoy watching Mr Ed when I was a child.
Have you not read that long before man was created satan walked and ruled the earth, his name then was lucifer or angel of light. He reigned on earth over the angels for what could have been billions of yrs. he then rebelled against God and the earth was left without form and void ( this means left chaotic). The Bible is clear that the earth was here long before man dawned it. The book of Gen describes a 6 day recreation of the earth so ,an could live on it after the war happened.
So the Genesis story is acutally the RE-Creation story. First I have heard of that. Do you have any references for that amazing conclusion?
That is getting right back to the meaning of what is is.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
That indicates that God created heaven and earth on the first day. It does not say anything about refurbishing or refurnishing the earth. It says created. You may find someone else who will give you wiggle room - a lot of it - on such claims but I won't.
Actually the hebrew term for without form and void means chaotic. For something to become chaotic it had to be unchaotic first. The Bible explains what the world was when lucifer walked on it.. This was long before man.
This article will explain it very well.
Sorry, slip of the finger. I don't understand why that quote is true or why it follows.
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire