Giant Galaxy Ring Shouldn't Exist

Institute for Creation Research ^ | 8-24-15 | Jake Hebert, Ph.D.

[ctdonath2]

Just to clarify, the only sentient being in the first few days of creation was God. If you agree He views a thousand years as a day, and He was the only one observing at the time, then we’re not necessarily limited to 24-hour days.

[jimmyray]

Quote: "Simple. It doesn't agree with geological science and the fossil record."

Nothing miraculous agrees with science! And the fossil record is in reality just buried, fossilized bones. It is only a "record" when you arrange it according preconceptions and ideology.

The most important miracle of all is the resurrection of the 3 day dead Christ, which obviously violates biological science, that is measurable and repeatable! Do you dismiss that scriptural record as well?

[jimmyray]

Believe what you will, and be happy with the science you place above the scripture you explain away.

Red Sea parting? 40 years in desert with Manna? Jericho? Walking on water? Healing the blind? Must all the miraculous go? What about the resurrection? That is impossible according to common observation and modern biology.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

The most important miracle of all is the resurrection of the 3 day dead Christ, which obviously violates biological science, that is measurable and repeatable! Do you dismiss that scriptural record as well?

Since modern man has walked the earth, some have claimed to witness miraculous happenings and still do. It's too tiring to sort this all out. I'll stick with the scientific method where we find order in the record and put the puzzle together as best we can. You can go on picking what miracles float your boat.

[jimmyray]

There it is! Agree to disagree.

[tacticalogic]

I'll stick with the scientific method where we find order in the record and put the puzzle together as best we can.

The alternative is to adopt the ICR paradigm that says the discovery of any scientific anomaly automatically renders every scientific theory inoperative and all of their conclusions wrong. And you have to do it while maintaining that you're staying within the site policy of not being "anti-science".

[Boogieman]

I don’t understand how asking for a citation, when someone claims that a fundamental tenet of science has been modified, is “looking for a gotcha”. If someone makes an extraordinary claim like that, it’s incumbent on them to provide the backup, and if they won’t, well that speaks for itself.

[DungeonMaster]

a new theory was emerging to take its place, where universes bounce in and out of existence, or something equivalent.

lol ... another theory whose main prediction is that you wont find any evidence to support it.

LOL, that's right there with "What if 'd' 'o' 'g' spelled 'cat'?". Revenge of the Nerds.

[DungeonMaster]

In other words, why do you ignore the plain reading of the scripture, and promote day-age theories? If God is God, Omnipotent and Omniscient, why did He bother taking 6 whole days, much less Billions? The clock He used and referenced us to was in days, which ONLY make sense regarding the revolution of the Earth, with evening and mornings. You do realize he created time on the first day? Before Genesis 1, there was no time! Time only exists to measure change, and since God is changeless...

Thanks for the post!

[DungeonMaster]

Why do you have eternity inside of your heart?

Because God put it there per His Word.