Evidence for God from Science

Cobra wrote:The Bible was still written by men and the comprehension of man is very limited.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

God always uses terms that we can understand

Yes He does:

Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

the understanding of man back then was less than it is now.

What? man's understanding was as good if not better 6000 years ago than it is today. Who filled your head with that nonsense?

We can never ever understand everything there is to know about God and ultimately we don't have to.

I believe this to be true of God, but not the Scriptures.

If God wanted to create the universe in 7 days or 7 billion years, it still makes no difference because the fact that it exists at all is a testament to God's design.

Psssst Cobra, I don't want to wake anyone else up but:

Exo 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

Keep it to yourself ok? I don't want to stir up the hornets nest

IRQ Conflict wrote:
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Yes He does:

Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

What? man's understanding was as good if not better 6000 years ago than it is today. Who filled your head with that nonsense?

I believe this to be true of God, but not the Scriptures.

Psssst Cobra, I don't want to wake anyone else up but:

Exo 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

Keep it to yourself ok? I don't want to stir up the hornets nest

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

This may or may not be true. It is hard to tell, which is why we should analyze the Bible. After all, every religion describes their text as inspired. Muslims believe that the Koran is designed by Allah and given to them through Mohammad. Believe in God yes, but not everyone who comes in the name of God is of God. Many Christians believe that the Bible just fell out of the sky. It did not. It was written and canonized by men who felt significance in the writings. There are tons of books that never made it into the New Testament.

"What? man's understanding was as good if not better 6000 years ago than it is today. Who filled your head with that nonsense?"

Our understanding is better. Instead of worshipping the sun as a god and bowing down to it, we now know that it is made of hydrogen and helium and is a great burning ball of gas.

"Psssst Cobra, I don't want to wake anyone else up but:

Exo 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."

Yes, but as the author of this site pointed out, the hebrew word for day is not absolute. It can mean a 12 hour period, a 24 hour period, or a really long time. Time in the Bible is also not absolute. Remember the battle where the sun didn't set? Also, when was the 24 hour day invented? Taking a measurement of time found in the 21st century and applying it to thousands of years ago is a common mistake made by Biblical analysts. Taking things in general in the 21st century and applying them to another is bad study.

Cobra, all of that which you state is the testimony of man, not God. If you don't believe in the Word, there is nothing, no scripture that will convince you. So this discussion is fruitless.

What I have said above is for those believing that The Word is the end all be all of everything. If you choose to believe man over God, it is to your ruin.

I pray you find the beginning of Wisdom and Knowledge.

Yes, but as the author of this site pointed out

I pray this for this sites owner as well.

How long did God rest after He created?

"Yom" when taken out of context can mean various things, as it is with ALL scripture.

Geez, this is exactly the type of crazy talk that drives people away from Christianity. Any thorough study of astronomy will reveal that the time needed for the stars and other heavenly objects to fully develop takes millions of years. You couldn't see them if they didn't. To roll your eyes and call someone a heathen just because they pointed out a fact is very ignorant. It doesn't contradict the Bible at all, the Bible has merely been taking out of context by people who make assumptions about the beginning of the world.

If God is really God, then does it matter how we got here? If He is in control over everything does it matter if he chooses 6 million years over 6 days? Does this mean that God is somehow weaker? The answer to all of them is no.

Cobra wrote:Geez, this is exactly the type of crazy talk that drives people away from Christianity.

Quite the contrary:

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Any thorough study of astronomy will reveal that the time needed for the stars and other heavenly objects to fully develop takes millions of years. You couldn't see them if they didn't.

Opps, threw the Word out the window didn't you?

To roll your eyes and call someone a heathen just because they pointed out a fact is very ignorant.

The fact is you believe what you see, not what God says.

It doesn't contradict the Bible at all, the Bible has merely been taking out of context by people who make assumptions about the beginning of the world.

The Word makes no assumptions.

If God is really God, then does it matter how we got here?

God wouldn't have told us in His Word if He thought it didn't matter.

If He is in control over everything does it matter if he chooses 6 million years over 6 days?

Yes it matters. Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

Does this mean that God is somehow weaker?

No, it means that man in his infinite wisdom is a fool. The begining of wisdom and knowledge is the fear of the Lord.

"Opps, threw the Word out the window didn't you?"

No, just the assumptions made about it. If God wanted you to know when He started things, He would have left a date at the beginning of the book. But He didn't. Instead He left you a clue: He described the creation as being in days and then He tells you that "A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day". It is a riddle. Just when you think you have figured God out is when He surprises you.

"The fact is you believe what you see, not what God says."

So anyone that doesn't line up with the one week theory is going to hell? That seems pretty dramatic.

"The Word makes no assumptions."

The Word may not, but the people who read it do. That is why there is still antisemitism in Europe today, because people read what they want to read. They stamp the Bible with their own preconcieved notions.

"God wouldn't have told us in His Word if He thought it didn't matter."

What I was saying is that you base your faith primarily on the creation argument. If that gets shot down, then you conclude that there is no God. You remind me of me a little bit, several years ago. Even if the entire Bible is somehow disproven tomarrow, that doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. God doesn't depend on the creation in a week story being true.

"Yes it matters. Without faith it is impossible to please Him."

Faith in what? God or an assumption? That is what I am trying to communicate. We added up the geneologies and got the number 6000, not God. The Bible never ever mentions how much time elapsed since the creation of the world. It merely gives the birth and death dates of individuals. We conclude that if we add them all up, we get the creation date. This is wrong. And then if you tie the assumption in with your faith, you are painting yourself into a corner.

No, just the assumptions made about it.

It's not an assumption when taken literally.

If God wanted you to know when He started things, He would have left a date at the beginning of the book. But He didn't. Instead He left you a clue:

As a matter of fact He did tell us, indirectly by counting backwards through the geneology. BTW the "Date" would have been the 6th day of 0 BC.

He described the creation as being in days

Yes, all 6 of them.

then He tells you that "A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day". It is a riddle. Just when you think you have figured God out is when He surprises you.

The context of that scripture was in relation to the future event of the day of our Lord. It has nothing to do with when God created the earth. It was in fact a reference to the longsuffering of God. No riddle, just sweet simple facts.

So anyone that doesn't line up with the one week theory is going to hell? That seems pretty dramatic.

Yes, that would be dramatic. Had I said that.

The Word may not, but the people who read it do. That is why there is still antisemitism in Europe today, because people read what they want to read. They stamp the Bible with their own preconcieved notions.

Yes, we were warned there would be many false prophets and anti-Christs. Just because others jump ship does not mean all have or should.

What I was saying is that you base your faith primarily on the creation argument.

Now that is a very good assumption. But false

If that gets shot down, then you conclude that there is no God.

How so?

Even if the entire Bible is somehow disproven tomarrow, that doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. God doesn't depend on the creation in a week story being true.

This is so true

Faith in what? God or an assumption? That is what I am trying to communicate.

Faith in God and of Christ that His word is Truth, but every man a liar. Basically what is said in scriptures is that we can and should trust the living Word of God over all that we hear apart from the Word. We should be scrutinizing our beliefs before we put the Word of God in our little box of human intellect

That very same faith that you put in radio telescopes and mass spectrometers, I choose to put in the Word of God. I don't deny that a star is x-million jugazwillion miles from here. But by the same token I cannot deny what the Word tells me based on my limited understanding of whats around me.

We added up the geneologies and got the number 6000, not God.

No, that number is reserved for man.

The Bible never ever mentions how much time elapsed since the creation of the world. It merely gives the birth and death dates of individuals. We conclude that if we add them all up, we get the creation date. This is wrong.

How is this wrong?

And then if you tie the assumption in with your faith, you are painting yourself into a corner.

The only assumption in my faith is that God is not a liar.

IRQ Conflict wrote: It's not an assumption when taken literally.

So you are going to pick and choose now what parts to take literally now in the Bible? Do you believe eating Jesus is canabalism? lol.

As a matter of fact He did tell us, indirectly by counting backwards through the geneology. BTW the "Date" would have been the 6th day of 0 BC.

*Sigh* I went over this already. This is the assumption made by televangelists and focus on the family people. Go to anyone who has studied these geneologies closely and they will tell you that there are gaps in them. Doesn't mean they are not true, just incomplete.

The context of that scripture was in relation to the future event of the day of our Lord. It has nothing to do with when God created the earth. It was in fact a reference to the longsuffering of God. No riddle, just sweet simple facts.

So certain are you? Many things in the Bible have a double meaning like when Jerimiah made the prophecy of a child being born of a virgin. That prophecy came true several months later and ensured that Judea would withstand the siege. It came true centuries later in the form of Jesus too.

Yes, we were warned there would be many false prophets and anti-Christs. Just because others jump ship does not mean all have or should.

It's not being a false prophet to point out facts. The fact is that it is impossible for the sun, moon and earth to be thousands of years old. They would not have completely developed. It takes 2 million years for light generated in the core of the sun to reach the surface of the sun and then from there 8 minutes to reach us. This doesn't contradict anything in the Bible, only what pastors and teachers have assumed for centuries. Don't burn us at the stake for heresy! Roflmao.

That very same faith that you put in radio telescopes and mass spectrometers, I choose to put in the Word of God. I don't deny that a star is x-million jugazwillion miles from here. But by the same token I cannot deny what the Word tells me based on my limited understanding of whats around me.

Have you ever heard of the Nicean creed?

How is this wrong?

It is jumping to conclusions that man is only a couple of days younger than the universe. We know this is not the case. We are carbon based lifeforms. Hydrogen and helium generate this carbon. And where does this hydrogen and helium come from? The sun. Stars are giant factories. "Let there be light." And from this light came all life. You were once gamma rays. To me this doesn't disprove God. It proves His genius. Who else could come up with such a thing?

The only assumption in my faith is that God is not a liar.

Never said that He was. What I don't trust is the interpretations of man. People did that in the middle ages and things ended badly.

Cobra, I was planning on rebutting your comments on a point by point basis. But I really hate circular arguments. It's obvious you believe so-called sciences over and above the Word of God.

Your argument that the Word says that "to God a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is like unto a day" has any bearing on the Billions or even millions of years that is proposed by OEC or naturalistic evilution is ridiculous. Lets do the math shall we?

1000 x 6= 6000 years. NOT BILLIONS OF YEARS! 6000!!! and thats arguing in your favour!!!

Have you ever heard of the Nicean creed

No, but I have heard of the Nicene creed.
Here is a link to what I believe and why I believe it.

Thus, as a 'revelationist,' I let God's Word speak to me, with the words having meaning according to the context of the language they were written in. Once I accept the plain words of Scripture in context, the fact of ordinary days, no death before sin, the Bible's genealogies, etc., all make it clear that I cannot accept millions or billions of years of history. Therefore, I would conclude there must be something wrong with man's ideas about the age of the universe.

Cobra wrote:Geez, this is exactly the type of crazy talk that drives people away from Christianity. Any thorough study of astronomy will reveal that the time needed for the stars and other heavenly objects to fully develop takes millions of years. You couldn't see them if they didn't. To roll your eyes and call someone a heathen just because they pointed out a fact is very ignorant. It doesn't contradict the Bible at all, the Bible has merely been taking out of context by people who make assumptions about the beginning of the world.

If God is really God, then does it matter how we got here? If He is in control over everything does it matter if he chooses 6 million years over 6 days? Does this mean that God is somehow weaker? The answer to all of them is no.

One might point out that the Earthly measurement of day and night wasn't possible until the second day, making Earthly measurements irrelevant when looking for the length of time God used in Creation.

BUT!! Clearly the time taken was divisible by six (seven with a day of rest thrown in). You have to be impressed that every scientific guess is divisible by the right biblical number.

Astute observation Wall-dog. Colour me impressed!

A little off topic, but I find the number 6 very interesting. Did you know that:

98.9% of the carbon atoms have 6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons

And I believe (haven't looked it up yet) the atomic number atributed to Carbon is also 6.

Anyone know the half life of carbon?

It's obvious you believe so-called sciences over and above the Word of God.

So I assume that if you were offered poison to drink, you would not hesitate to take considering that the Bible says you would be ok? The Bible encourages us to test what we think is true so that we may know for ourselves. Accepting something just because mommy and daddy did just proves that you are guilable.

1000 x 6= 6000 years. NOT BILLIONS OF YEARS! 6000!!! and thats arguing in your favour!!!

Well at least now you admit that the earth is 12000 years old, that is a start. Go back and research the word "Yom" instead of taking what you know to be a day and enforcing it on scripture.

No, but I have heard of the Nicene creed.

Same thing. Ok, then you must know that there were thousands of scriptures and texts that did not make it into the Bible. They were written by the same types of people. What makes the ones in the Bible special? The men with the funny hats say so?

Anyone know the half life of carbon?

Roughly 5700 years.

Also try this:

Young Earth creationism was abandoned as a mainstream scientific concept over 150 years ago. While many mainstream scientists respect it as a faith position, they contend that it is little more than that and regard attempts to prove it scientifically as being little more than religiously motivated pseudoscience. In 1997, a poll by the Gallup organization showed that 5% of US scientists believed in Young Earth creationism; however, not all creationists are YECs. Some subscribe to Old Earth creationism, which posits an act of creation that took place millions or billions of years ago.

Over the past century and a half, several scientific disciplines have found evidence which conflicts with many Young Earth creationist claims. This includes findings from geology, paleontology, molecular biology, dendrochronology, genomics, physical anthropology, astronomy, physics and archaeology, amongst other sciences. Criticism of Young Earth creationism thus comes not only from supporters of evolutionary biology, against which creationism is most often contrasted, but from a very wide range of sciences. Some mainstream scientists further argue that supernatural explanations are by their very nature unrepeatable, unfalsifiable and untestable, and therefore cannot be subjected to the scientific method.

Critics argue that every challenge to evolution by Young Earth creationists is interpreted in an unscientific fashion or is readily explainable by mainstream science, or that while a gap in scientific knowledge may exist now it is likely to be closed through further research. While mainstream scientists acknowledge that there are indeed a number of gaps in the mainstream scientific theory, they generally reject the creationist viewpoint that these gaps represent insurmountable flaws with evolution. Those working in the field who pointed out the gaps in the first place have often explicitly rejected the creationist interpretation. The "God of the gaps" viewpoint has also been criticized by theologians, although creationists claim that their models are based on what is known, not on gaps in knowledge.

Christian Young Earth creationists adhere strongly to the concept of Biblical inerrancy, which critics regard as being incompatible with scientific objectivity, in which the Bible is deemed to be infallible and non-correctable. (As the website of the creationist organization Answers in Genesis says: "The primary authority for Answers in Genesis is the infallible Word of God, the Bible."). The pro-creationist Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and the Answers in Genesis (AiG) organization also require their members to pledge their support for Biblical inerrancy.

Critics reject the common YEC assertion or imputation that many or all supporters of evolutionary theory are motivated by atheism. They point out that many supporters of evolutionary theory are religious believers and that major religious groups such as the Catholic Church and Church of England do not reject the concept of biological evolution and do not support the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Critics also argue that those working in the field of evolutionary biology are not required to sign up to a statement of (dis)belief comparable to that used by the ICR and AiG, although YECs claim that many scientists operate on the basis of an a priori disbelief in Biblical principles. [10] Scientists exhibit a full spectrum of beliefs from full religious devotion through to atheism.

Young Earth creationists are also accused of "quote mining", selectively and dishonestly quoting statements and evidence from mainstream science in order to support their assertions, while omitting significant context and mentions of contrary evidence [11]. Defenders of Young Earth creationism argue that it is a legitimate use of a hostile witness to cite an evolutionist disagreeing with some aspect of evolution.

-Wikepedia Encyclopedia

What we know in science is undesputable fact. It happened. The earth cannot be only 6000 years old. The question is who created the myth that it was 6000 years old? The Bible or people who read it the wrong way?

And for the days, what came first: the days in which God created or the 24 hour days which we created. The 24 hour system wasn't invented until later!

"Does this mean that the earth is billions of years old, or that humans have been in existence for millions of years? Not necessarily. Perhaps humans have only been around for, say, 50,000 years. That seems compatible with the way the genealogies work. What it does mean is that although scripture is God's divine word, all interpretations of it are not infallible, and there is more to the Bible than is apparent at first reading."-http://home.earthlink.net/~mflabar/AgeEarth.htm

It was also accepted practice at the time the OT was written to take liberties with genealogies, such as skipping large numbers of people who aren't important and even to move people around in the genealogies. Those are things we would consider unacceptable today, but back when the OT was written that was 'the norm'.

Critics argue that every challenge to evolution by Young Earth creationists is interpreted in an unscientific fashion or is readily explainable by mainstream science, or that while a gap in scientific knowledge may exist now it is likely to be closed through further research

Lamarck, who believed in an innate tendency towards perfection in all organic beings, seems to have felt this difficulty so strongly that he was led to suppose that new and simple forms are continually being produced by spontaneous generation. Science has not as yet proved the truth of this belief, whatever the future may reveal,

Darwin The Origin of Species p. 91, 92.

Hmmm, I think Darwin was reincarnated.

So I assume that if you were offered poison to drink, you would not hesitate to take considering that the Bible says you would be ok?

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Well at least now you admit that the earth is 12000 years old, that is a start.

Still not up on the math yet eh?

Go back and research the word "Yom" instead of taking what you know to be a day and enforcing it on scripture.

I have researched Yom. The context where one finds it in relation to the Word leaves no doubt in a Rabbis mind that it refers to a literal day. That is one morning and one evening. Heres a link you can check out and educate yourself on the scriptual context of Yom.

Roughly 5700 years.

yup! 5730 years!