Image from ICR article.
Posted on 08/01/2013 10:40:10 AM PDT by fishtank
Image from ICR article.
No.
As long as people actively attempt to discredit Christianity by discrediting creation, we have to have apologetics focused on providing a defense of creation.
We don’t have to fear science. That’s the bottom line. Just like we don’t have to fear archeology. We don’t have to fear millions of years. Mt St Helens shows us exactly what those walls are - hydrological sorting that happen extremely quickly in a catastrophic event. Why there are marine specimens at the tops of mountains.
Skeptics will be skeptics. Many truly do not want it to be true, the famous paraphrase of a biologist “evolution doesn’t work, but I stay with it because the alternative is personally horrifying” mentality pervades a great deal of these people. With those statements they have already said they will ignore evidence, they will not care even if it’s true when they know their evidence and arguments don’t work, they are refusing it because they don’t want to accept it - not even as a possibility because it’s too terrible for them to consider.
Jesus said you’ll always have the poor with you. He could have easily said you’ll always have people who will refuse to believe, too. Some people lived with Jesus, knew Him, knew who He claimed to be, saw and heard the miracles, and still didn’t believe. Some of those unbelievers even decided to persecute Him. If some today do the same thing to us when we present arguments and evidence, we must not be surprised.
Yes.
What did Jesus ever say about Creation?
Why would creation that took billions of years prevent the Christ from being your savior?
If the Bible is infaillable, is the Bible an infaillable doorstop? Of course not, because the Bible should not be used as a doorstop. The Bible should also not be used as a biology textbook.
You have never thought that the purpose of attacking biblical creation is to discredit the source and cast doubt on other areas of it?
God’w Word itself declares there’s no mistakes in its content, that what is recorded is true and has been kept true. God Himself in the book says He will keep His Word true.
Do you not see this is what they are attempting to do? Cast doubt on the recorded historicity in the bible. Relegating actual events to “stories”. Then wherever something sounds too incredible, or unprovable because they were singular-type events, who’s to say these aren’t stories either? How could Jesus be born of a virgin?
I hope you see where this leads, unchecked.
And more so, do you not understand that everything rests on genesis.
God Created everything.
God created mand from the ground. Physically formed him out of earth. Breathed His spirit into him. Billions of years is not the same thing.
God made woman from Adam. Not the same as billions of years.
There was no death in this world until man sinned and fell. Not the same as billions of years (of death).
God reveals that one day He will bring a kinsmen Redeemer to set things right (genesis 3) - a point ahead to Jesus Christ.
Genesis is a foundation of the faith. The concept of billions of years undermines key concepts that Genesis puts down that undergird the rest of a Christians faith. THEY know that and that’s why they attack it. If they can get people doubting it they can make them doubt the bible in other areas.
I am unclear why you don’t see their tactic for what it is. Nor how effective it’s been because we haven’t had people who could respond to someone who’s been exposed to it, by a college prof who has the intent on destroying as many Christian kids’ faith as they possibly can.
Nor should a biology textbook be used as a history book.
But how do you explain away scientific evidence that supports "the concept of billions of years"? For example, there are quasars out in space that are more than 20 billion light years away--that is, it took more than 20 billion years for their light to reach Earth.
Gravitational Time Dilation - per Albert Einstein - seems to be the best explanation for apparent long ages of the Earth and Universe.
There are many things which science can not still fully explain with neither a creation nor evolution basis, but the appointed authorities don’t like to discuss any inconvenient facts.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
I will answer your question with a question. Did Jesus grow and ferment the grapes before turning the water into wine? The universe was created through a miracle and with apparent age. Same as the loaves and fishes. The fish were not caught, nor did they evolve first from pond scum while the 5 thousand waited to be fed. The bread was not baked by hand, but was given to feed the 5 thousand miraculously.
excellent book from dr humphreys, i have it and love it, my creation science library is huge and this is always a go to book....
If the apparent age is due to time dialation, then stating any measured age amounts to heresy. All physical measurements will rely on dialted time.
Lots of things appear to be old but are not.
If we had not had video and photographic evidence of Mt St Helens carving out canyons in a day, but appearing exactly like the Grand canyon “layers” tey claim took millions of years to make, but hydrological sorting in a day can make identical canyons with the same kind of layers...
If you look at polonium in minerals, if you understand you can under great pressure and energy make petrified wood in a few days, if you understand the fact that all dating methods assume things that may not be true, such as air and atmospheric temperatures being the same as today, and that there are flaws in dating methods, if you look at the fact they are finding organic material (marrow, blood cells) in animals they claim were dead millions of years - conflicting with their own certainties that that is not possible to have organic tissue and cells surviving in millions of years old remains...
Someone mentioned einsteins time dilation for certain reasons why we can see the universe the way we do.
All I know is that things may appear to be older than they actually are. Given bad assumptions and limitations of dating methods, I am open to the idea there are problems with man’s measuring methods. I believe that a reasonable person can look at the evidence and how the evidence is measured that they can have problems with the measuring and the assumptions that go along with the meadurement methods, and based on other evidence of nature being able to create things that if we did not observe, some would look at and say it took millions of years to do, but in reality took far shorter time to create, I believe it supports the concept that the biblical creation account happened the way it is described.
I thought the purpose of evolution as a theory was to explain changes in animal forms found in geograpical strata.
The oil company geologists have been finding oil for over a hundred years by looking at various fossils, and determining how far down they need to go to find oil. The same sequence of fossil changes keep being found, indicating that the living creatures evolve.
The alternative is a combination of
1. Special creation of each form of creature we find and
2. Special delivery to detect each form where we find them.
Why is it a given that the assumptions are bad? Aren't you simply substituting one set of assumptions for another that has even less supporting evidence behind them?
The standard way of explaining it, is a mature, created-in-place universe...i.e. that light radiating from very distant stars and galaxies was created in place at the same time as those distant objects. Another approach, is not assuming the speed of light is constant...
The most creative method, imho, is postulated by an orthodox Jewish physicist from Israel...which says, since Einstein’s relativity law shows us that time is relative to the observer, one could have 6 literal, 24 hour days pass to an observer traveling at very nearly the speed of light...with 15 BILLION YEARS (estimated age of the universe)passing for others.
So do you believe that dinosaurs existed at the same time as humans? If so, what evidence do you have of that?
Sure. We still have celocanths swimming around. We have every civilization recording encounters with what we’d classify as dinosaurs. Those pics on cave walls weren’t just make believe. These people were recording events. You can’t just say some were events and some that don’t fit my preconceived world view are fantasy or these we’ll regard as actual events and these we won’t because we believe that’s impossible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.