Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then, I take it, that you believe the bible is a lie.
Can you please provide the evidence that the Bible says the Earth is only 6000 years old. Can you please provide the evidence that the Bible says man did not evolve. Can you then please prove that your conclusions are factual and not just loose interpretations.
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Can you please provide the evidence that the Bible says the Earth is only 6000 years old. Can you please provide the evidence that the Bible says man did not evolve. Can you then please prove that your conclusions are factual and not just loose interpretations.
There is a lot of information on the Internet about the age of the Earth according to the bible. I don't want to post links on the topic.
The beginning of the bible talks about Adam and Eve. Again, I'm not going to post links or scripture.
Originally posted by Da Pittmanhere no evidence, see no evidence, eh? you are ignoring my posts. Did you or did you not look at my astrological theories and/or Polonium Halos found in granite?
I
Please explain how you can test that “God did it”? Nice how you skip over the fact that you are contradicting yourself by saying that it is now a science when you are the one that started this by saying that it is not a science and is a religion. Explain that. 😉As for you question yes I have, I do it on a daily basis. So what about your links, so far that doesn’t support what you are saying. You keep making unfounded statements based off of limited information such as people living for a millennia, the Earth spinning so fast that it couldn’t support life and crap like that. Please explain how the orbital variations proves that they Earth is not over 100,000 years old?
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
People backing up their untrue claims.
the whole 6000 yrs issue came from some religious guy who decided to count the ages of all the ppl in the bible and their lineage dating back to adam and eve.
if we take the believe that the bible is factual with its historical references, then the natural progression would be that some one would make the claim of the earth age being 6000 yrs.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the whole 6000 yrs issue came from some religious guy who decided to count the ages of all the ppl in the bible and their lineage dating back to adam and eve.if we take the believe that the bible is factual with its historical references, then the natural progression would be that some one would make the claim of the earth age being 6000 yrs.
I know Bishop Usher and I know his claims, they are hardly substantial though and were not even accepted by everyone in his own time. The fact is, it looks like Shaky didn't know- he just knew that for some reason certain Christians believe the earth is only 6000 years old...he didn't know why the believed that because he hadn't done his research and was talking about something he knew nothing about. (That may be untrue but what with his resistance to provide evidence, what else can I assume?)
so your argument to his statement had nothing to do with what he stated..
but that fact that he showed no evidence even though you were aware as to how some may come to believe the age issue of earth and the bible reference.
hmm..... i would have simply explained to him or would have bn the bigger person and admitted to him that fact that you are aware of his argument.
cant really learn and debate if you withhold knowledge from others even if it goes against your argument.
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
If only you had some evidence.
Evidence for what? If you mean evidence for what people believe is in the bible, or for what is really in the Bible?
My main problem with taking this side of the argument is; I know what is in the Bible, and what is not. I also know what some people believe, because I was raised a fundamentalist Christian.
Your point is that what people believe is in the Bible is really not there. I would like to know what you believe is there. Perhaps, you should start a thread.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
so your argument to his statement had nothing to do with what he stated..but that fact that he showed no evidence even though you were aware as to how some may come to believe the age issue of earth and the bible reference.
hmm..... i would have simply explained to him or would have bn the bigger person and admitted to him that fact that you are aware of his argument.
cant really learn and debate if you withhold knowledge from others even if it goes against your argument.
Thank you so much for your defence, but he knew that I knew, and I knew that he knew. 😄
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Evidence for what? If you mean evidence for what people believe is in the bible, or for what is really in the Bible?My main problem with taking this side of the argument is; I know what is in the Bible, and what is not. I also know what some people believe, because I was raised a fundamentalist Christian.
Your point is that what people believe is in the Bible is really not there. I would like to know what you believe is there. Perhaps, you should start a thread.
The Bible does not calculate that the Earth is 6000 years old...some people reach that conclusion by adding up lifetimes, as I said it is not a reliable conclusion- the Bible is not a complete genealogy.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say how long it took to create man (1 day could be anything) nor does it say if this is a literal creation, metaphorical spiritual etc.
Also, evolution can't happen in 6000 years? Omnipotent God says it can.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Thank you so much for your defence, but he knew that I knew, and I knew that he knew. 😄
How dare he interfere in our fun! 😠 😛
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Thank you so much for your defence, but he knew that I knew, and I knew that he knew. 😄
yeah the only thing i am confused about this argument is the evidence issue...
evidence to what? the age of earth compared to the bible?
what would one consider evidence a physical item in hand, which is hard to do online. or is it majority acceptance of believe, better yet an abstract concept of mathematical equations that help count the age of earth through archeological and astronomical dating...
the weakest argument is basically witness evidence that many ppl like to take which is stupid because it negates both sides.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
yeah the only thing i am confused about this argument is the evidence issue...evidence to what? the age of earth compared to the bible?
what would one consider evidence a physical item in hand, which is hard to do online. or is it majority acceptance of believe, better yet an abstract concept of mathematical equations that help count the age of earth through archeological and astronomical dating...
the weakest argument is basically witness evidence that many ppl like to take which is stupid because it negates both sides.