Evidence for God from Science

Author Anita Meyer wrote:

Anita, why don't you understand that someone can believe in God AND an old Earth?

Look, I fully understand Rick. I just do not agree. I am at the mature point right now in my life where I've decided that if I am going to believe the Bible, it is going to be by its literal word. None of this wishy-washy business. I take it at face value - G-d's word! So far I've learned that the later is always prerequisite to the former.

When one starts picking it apart it looses value. You either believe what it says, or you don't. Its as simple as that.

If you believe that your OECs views are correct then challenge me with data, and not just by saying that I don't understand it.

AGAIN, Anita. You don't understand OEC! You are saying that yec is the only "literal" translation of the Bible. The same mistake that many YECs make. We have gone through this on the forum many times before. One LITERAL meaning of yom is a long period of time. Just because you or anyone else believes that yom in Genesis means 24 hour day, doesn't change the fact that a long period of time is ONE valid, LITERAL interpretation of the text. You are equating the translation that you believe with God's word. You don't have a monopoly on the Bible! Please read Ross' book. I believed in YEC because I thought anything else meant I had to believe in Darwinian evolution. When I actually studied OEC, I began to see that it is a valid interpretation. If you take the time to understand OEC, and still don't agree with it, that's one thing. But your posts misrepresent OEC so much that I can see you haven't taken the time to understand OEC. What are you afraid of?

AGAIN, Anita. You don't understand OEC! You are saying that yec is the only "literal" translation of the Bible. The same mistake that many YECs make. We have gone through this on the forum many times before. One LITERAL meaning of yom is a long period of time. Just because you or anyone else believes that yom in Genesis means 24 hour day, doesn't change the fact that a long period of time is ONE valid, LITERAL interpretation of the text. You are equating the translation that you believe with God's word. You don't have a monopoly on the Bible! Please read Ross' book. I believed in YEC because I thought anything else meant I had to believe in Darwinian evolution. When I actually studied OEC, I began to see that it is a valid interpretation. If you take the time to understand OEC, and still don't agree with it, that's one thing. But your posts misrepresent OEC so much that I can see you haven't taken the time to understand OEC. What are you afraid of?

I did read this book not to long ago. He is a OEC. He believes the scientific evidence that the evolutionists put forth of the old age of the earth and the Universe. Yet at the same time he rejects evolution and biogenesis which is a contradiction. He also believes that Noah's ark was only a local flood, but killed all humans. He came to this decision because of the biodiversity in animals. This is all hearsay and as well contradicting. Yes, I remember he also talks about the starlight problem and he talks about the days of Genesis being longer than just 24 hour days, but in that same breath he claims they are in sequential order which is also contradicting.

Sorry Rick, I do not agree with him on many issues.

Ross does not see the whole picture. What Ross fails to completely understand is that there is a time scale built into scripture. If he were perhaps Jewish and studied and understood the Jewish holidays he might understand this calendar of time. Basically, it revolves around a segment of time involving the number 7 (G-d's number). If we are clever we can figure this out to being the culmination of 7,000 years of time. We are pretty close to that date today.

This whole chronology of time started in Genesis and revolving around a 24 hour period of time. I've explained this here:

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 609#p82609

Then we also have the genealogy of the patriarchs and the age chronology of the Bible from Adam to Jesus which also fits into this span of time.

Adam - 930
Lamech - 874-1651
Noah - 1056-2006
Terah - 1879-2084
Abraham - 2009-2184
Flood - 1650

Additionally we know the timeline today from Jesus was 2,000 years, and from Jesus to Abraham was 2,000 years, and from Abraham back to Adam is about 2,000 years which gives us an approximate age of 6,000 years old. Which may also pose the question that the 7,000th year may be the golden jubilee year since 7 is a number throughout the Bible that encompasses completion. Genesis 2:2-3 - By the seventh day G-d had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And G-d blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.The gathering of the first fruits… Leviticus 25:3-7 - For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your vineyards and gather their crops. But in the seventh year the land is to have a sabbath of rest, a sabbath to the Lord. Do not sow your fields or prune your vineyards. The year of Jubilee… Leviticus 25:8-13 - Count off seven sabbaths of years—seven times seven years—so that the seven sabbaths of years amount to a period of forty-nine years. Then have the trumpet sounded everywhere on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the Day of Atonement sound the trumpet throughout your land. Consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you; each one of you is to return to his family property and each to his own clan. The fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you; do not sow and do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the untended vines. For it is a jubilee and is to be holy for you; eat only what is taken directly from the fields. In this Year of Jubilee everyone is to return to his own property. There are far more reaching implication here since it may also signify the day of the Lords coming… Returning… The year of the Lords favor… The day of atonement… The holiday of Rosh Hashanah. Jesus' returns to gather the first fruits (the believers). The rapture… For every commandment there is a far reaching reason and purpose behind it in the fulfilling and prophetic culmination of G-d great plan.

We are now currently at, according to the Jewish calendar 5,770, which is just slightly under the 6,000 mark.

What I am getting at here is that the Bible has a deadline set at 7,000 years! This is the deadline, which is all part of G-d's redemptive plan for humankind. Millions/billions of yeas does not fit into this plan.

This is also beautifully outlaid for us when we consider the amount of people populating the earth today. It is just about the number you would expect if eight people (Noah and his family) walked off of an ark only 4500 years ago. (I encourage readers to investigate the math of human population growth to discover this for themselves). Briefly, we have a current population of approximately 7 billion people on the planet today. Now we've been taking population censuses ever since biblical times and it has been determined that the world population has historically doubled every 150 years. Upon which the 7 billion population we have today is equivalent to 8 people walking off an ark and 150 years later there are only 12 people (give or take a few) on the earth and 300 years later 24 people (give or take a few) on the earth. You find out you only have to double 30 times to get the current population of the world 30x150 years means they walked off that ark after the great flood approximately 4500 years ago. Its not a perfect method or estimation, but it sure does agree with G-d's word. Genesis 7:21 - And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man. Job 22:15-17 - Hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden? Which were cut down out of time, whose foundation was overflown with a flood: Which said unto G-d, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them? 2 Peter 3:6 - Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.

The Bible is mathematically correct in all instances. For example when it tells us that there were 3 million Jews that left Egypt and arrived at Mount Sinai it does the math for us to reveal this. It also gives us the measurements of Noah's ark and the Ark of the Covenant and many other things. The Bible has never been found to be mathematically incorrect!

This number is calculated for us in the Torah estimating 3 million Jews at Mt. Sinai. Exodus 12:37 - The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot, the men, besides the young children. Numbers 1:1-3 - The Lord spoke to Moses in the Sinai Desert, in the Tent of Meeting on the first day of the second month, in the second year after the exodus from the land of Egypt, saying. Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by families following their fathers' houses; a head count of every male according to the number of their names. From twenty years old and upwards, all who are fit to go out to the army in Israel, you shall count them by their legions you and Aaron. Numbers 1:46-47 - The sum of all those who were counted: six hundred and three thousand, five hundred and fifty. But the Levites, according to their father's tribe were not numbered among them. Numbers 3:43 (regarding the Levites) - And all the firstborn males by the number of names, from a month old and upward, of those that were numbered of them, were twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen. Now if you take the number 600,000 (or more accurately 603,550) and add Levites (which in chapter 3, is placed at about 22,000) and add women and children - a conservative estimate of one child per family, would net about 2 million people. In reality, it was most probably over 3 million.

Now Rick, when the bible says it took six days to create the earth, I tend to believe it did!

One should also consider that with the advancement of human technology, we can make oil in one day, coal can be made in one week and petrified wood can also be petrified in one week (one can get the chemical ingredients for tuning wood into petrified rock which is nothing more than silicon and aluminum compounds). The chemical components used to artificially petrify wood can also be found in natural conditions such as around volcanoes and sedimentary rock and its possible for natural petrification to occur rapidly by these processes Also stalactites which are claimed to be thousands of years old have been observed to grow as fast as one inch a year, and we can even create cubic zirconia diamonds in one day in a lab which are almost as high-quality as real diamonds (other synthetic gems can also be created except for granite). Now, if man can create what science tells us takes millions of years for the earth to create, imagine how much more potential G-d possess to have created everything within 6 days. Logic tells us it can be done!

I am not downing Ross's book, he has every right to write about what he believes. I on the other hand have expanded my knowledge a little more enough to know the difference.

I read a lot!

Author Anita Meyer wrote: Adam - 930
Lamech - 874-1651
Noah - 1056-2006
Terah - 1879-2084
Abraham - 2009-2184
Flood - 165

This is NUTS, It is just a little something called Ancestor Worship can't you see that? How are you supposed to be concentrating on your God Kristus if you worship a distant ancestor as a kind of super human being. Ignorance should be a sin, in actual fact it IS spoken against in the bible. So why can you believe this?

Now Rick, when the bible says it took six days to create the earth, I tend to believe it did!

A pinch of salt would do you good.

Now, if man can create what science tells us takes millions of years for the earth to create, imagine how much more potential G-d possess to have created everything within 6 days. Logic tells us it can be done!

Yes but the fossil and genetic evidence points towards something else entirely? Whos to say that God taking billions of years to bring the universe to how it is now, means that his power is limited? Doesn't that sound like a more majestic time scale than 6 days? Science tells us about reality, i take it that you ARE scientifically literate? Do you know how much effort it took to create just a simple synthetic lifeform? It took quite a lot more time than 6 days and it took a bit more money than god has Logic does cut both ways, but reality doesn't.

Kristoffer wrote:

Author Anita Meyer wrote: Adam - 930
Lamech - 874-1651
Noah - 1056-2006
Terah - 1879-2084
Abraham - 2009-2184
Flood - 165

This is NUTS, It is just a little something called Ancestor Worship can't you see that? How are you supposed to be concentrating on your God Kristus if you worship a distant ancestor as a kind of super human being. Ignorance should be a sin, in actual fact it IS spoken against in the bible. So why can you believe this?

Here is a very short article on this:

Question: "Why did the people in Genesis live such long lives?"

Answer: It is somewhat of a mystery why people in early chapters of Genesis lived such long lives. There are many theories put forward by biblical scholars. The genealogy in Genesis 5 records the line of the godly descendants of Adam—the line that would eventually produce the Messiah. God possibly blessed this line with especially long life as a result of their godliness and obedience. While this is a possible explanation, the Bible nowhere specifically limits the long lifespans to the individuals mentioned in Genesis chapter 5. Further, other than Enoch, Genesis 5 does not identify any of the individuals as being especially godly. It is likely that everyone at that time period lived several hundred years. Several factors probably contributed to this.

Genesis 1:6-7 mentions the water above the expanse, a canopy of water that surrounded the earth. Such a water canopy would have created a greenhouse effect and would have blocked much of the radiation that now hits the earth. This would have resulted in ideal living conditions. Genesis 7:11 indicates that, at the time of the flood, the water canopy was poured out on the earth, ending the ideal living conditions. Compare the life spans before the flood (Genesis 5:1-32) with those after the flood (Genesis 11:10-32). Immediately after the flood, the ages decreased dramatically.

Another consideration is that in the first few generations after creation, the human genetic code had developed few defects. Adam and Eve were created perfect. They were surely highly resistant to disease and illness. Their descendants would have inherited these advantages, albeit to lesser degrees. Over time, as a result of sin, the human genetic code became increasingly corrupted, and human beings became more and more susceptible to death and disease. This would also have resulted in drastically reduced lifespans.

You may also try this article, it is very long though so maybe you should take time to read and research it when time permits, but it is from the main site:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/longlife.html

Author Anita Meyer wrote:Hello Zoegirl,

The Hawaiian volcano “Kilauea” was recorded to have erupted less than 200 years ago and the lava from this eruption was submerged under water. It was later dated to be 22 million years old. Other samples come from “Hualalai” which erupted in 1800 were dated to be 300 thousand million years old.

I would like your reference please, because I am finding nothing like you say when I google search. Stop being obscure and simply provide your reference!!!

Here is your basic problem...you are making conclusions erroneously, based on not understanding the methodology:

From asa3.org

Some young-Earth proponents recently reported that rocks were dated by the potassium-argon method to be a several million years old when they are really only a few years old. But the potassium-argon method, with its long half-life, was never intended to date rocks only 25 years old. These people have only succeeded in correctly showing that one can fool a single radiometric dating method when one uses it improperly. The false radiometric ages of several million years are due to parentless argon, as described here, and first reported in the literature some fifty years ago. Note that it would be extremely unlikely for another dating method to agree on these bogus ages. Getting agreement between more than one dating method is a recommended practice.

http://www.asa3.org/asa/resources/wiens.html#page%204

NOtice that the issue has been known and discussed and PUBLIC since the fifties!! This is an issue that is essentially a non-issue.

anita meyers wrote:Its not just the rocks from the Mount St. Helens eruption, there are also numerous false readings from other known newly formed rocks such as from Mount Ngauruhoe (an active volcano) located in New Zealand. These rocks are known to have been newly formed from the eruptions starting in 1949 and they have been dated to be millions of years old.

Additionally, the erosional features at Mount St. Helens are not unique, but are similar to those observed elsewhere. Other examples of rapid erosion are: Lituya Bay, Alaska created in 1958... The volcanic island Surtsey south of Iceland created in 1964... Lake Peigneur, Louisiana 1980... A rain storm in southern Brazil 1974... The Waiho River of New Zealand 1965... Providence Canyon State Park near Lumpkin, Georgia 1820... The Imperial Valley of California by the Colorado River from 1905 to 1907 (the Salton Sea).

If you like you can do a Google search on these to see what you can find.

Same problems!! You cannot deliberately use a dating method improperly.

In the future, it is proper form to provide your sources! Provide links if necessary, but it is rather rude to not provide the source of one's information.

would have blocked much of the radiation that now hits the earth

, yea a big sheet of ice would block radiation...including light.

I can see how certain conditions could result in extreme life times, Just I can not view 900 as entirely possible. Everything seems to conspire to kill us and if we lived on a world with a stronger magnetic shield and with stronger immune systems fighting of weaker virii and bacterium, while eating healthily and exercising properly then our life span could be quite long assuming we don't do something stupid.

I do not see how you can't be a little critical of these figures. How is it not Worship to give those people massively extended lifetimes that they might not of actually had?

I need to do some research, but I had read or heard not too long ago how these particles from the sun go through us and damage things. Now, it was a particular particle that is most devastating, since I think more than one do this. If this particle didn't damage us, we could live very long indeed.

As for questioning things in the bible, yes I have, and yes I still do. But I know that there's a reasonable explanation somewhere, if it isn't a mystery outright. There have been many things through history where people thought something was just totally mysterious, but then eventually an explanation became available. Much of what we use today would seem totally like magic to people of the past.

Its a witch, may we burn her!

Anita,

There is no contradiction in believing in an old earth and universe, and not believing in evolution.

Noah's flood was local. Four diferent accounts of day three say that water could never again cover the earth after land was formed (Job 38:10-11; Psalm 104:7-9; Proverbs 8:29; Jeremiah 5:22).

I've written a response to many youngearth objects to a local flood:

1) Why did the flood account use global language?
The main Hebrew word describing the extent of the flood is erets, but this word can mean a number of things. The context is the key to its meaning.
Planet — Gen. 1:1, 2
Continents — Gen. 1:10, 24
Region/country — Gen. 2:11, 12 and 13; 4:16
People — Gen. 11:1 (see 11:6 - What had the same language?)

Three other words are also used:
Har — It can mean mountain or hill. Even some Y.E. creationists believe that Gen. 7:19-20 is only referring to hills. They claim that mountains were formed towards the end of the Flood.

Charabah — Gen. 7:22 it means dry land/ground

Adamah — land/ground. It is used interchangeably with erets in Gen. 7:21-22, 7:23, 8:7-8 and 8:13.

Here are places in the Flood account where both erets and/or adamah are defining a clearly local area in Gen. 8:7, 8, 11 & 13.

As shown above, there are three Hebrew words used to describe the extent of the flood: erets, adamah, and charabah. The last two have a more limited definition and adamah is used interchangeably with erets in the text. Since both erets and adamah are used in the flood narrative to describe clearly local areas, there are really no good reasons to see the flood as global, even in this main flood text. Well, what about other Biblical texts describing the Flood?

2) What did Jesus say?
Jesus in Matt. 24:38-39; Luke 17:27-29 only refers to the flood as universal to humanity, not to it being global. Luke shows the flood was limited (geographically), but universal by using the exact same phase that he used for the destruction of Sodom in the days of Lot, "and destroyed THEM all." This phrase is clearly referring to the people not the planet.

3) What did Peter say?
Peter indicates that it was local. II Peter 3:5 refers to the creation of the heavens and the giving of form to the planet. This last part is obviously referring to when God gathered the seas and made dry land appear to give the planet contour (creation day 3). In verse 7 he says that the same heavens and earth (planet) will be destroyed by fire.

Unlike what many Y.E. creationists say, this is not a contrast between a global judgment by water and a global judgment by fire. Peter is stating that each event was and will be controlled by God's word. The flood is not being contrasted with the final judgment.

The word for earth in verses 5, 7 and 10 is the Greek word Ge. But, what Peter says was flooded, by water (vs. 6), is the Greek word Kosmos. He uses this word earlier in chapter 2 verse 5 to describe the flooding of the people. Both places are referring to the people, not the planet.

4) Why does the text uses the term ALL.
ALL here means everything in the region (erets).
Why is the effect said to be limited to land creatures (Gen. 6:7, 17; 7:4, 21-23) if it was a global event? Surely the creatures in the sea would have died. But, a local flood in the Mesopotamian valley would not affect sea life, especially if it occurred when sea levels were low (no Persian Gulf).

5) Why didn't Noah just move? Why build an Ark?
Noah was a Preacher (II Peter 2:5) and God wants all people to repent (Ezek. 18:23 and II Peter 3:9). How would all people hear about the coming judgment and the need for repentance if they lived on the other side of the planet?
The building of the ark was part of the message of coming judgment (Heb. 11:7 and I Peter 3:20).

6) Why didn't birds just fly away?
God's purpose in sending the flood was to kill them too. The 40 days of rain must have been severe enough to ground and drown them.

7) How could a local flood cover the mountains?
As mentioned above (see #1), even some young-earth creationists do not believe that mountains are what were meant in Genesis 7:19-20. The text speaks of high hills. No land would have been visible because the horizon would have concealed even the distant mountains.

How could a local flood last a year?
A flood 400 plus feet deep covering 180,000 plus square miles seems as though it could last a year. There is some evidence that sand dunes blocked the southern opening of the Persian Gulf region during at least one era when sea levels were low (see link to Ward, E. Stanford's essay).

9) How were people living outside of the area killed by a local flood?
The Bible, in Gen. 1-11, indicates that everyone lived in one location (Mesopotamia). Chapter 10 refers to events after chapter 11.

10) Did God lie about never sending another flood, because there have since been many local floods?
No local flood has since destroyed the whole human race and the land and animals associated with them (Gen. 9:11).

11) Why was a special word used to refer to the flood (mabbuwl)?
Any flood as extensive and destructive as this one deserves a special word. Even a local flood like the one old-earth creationists believe in is far larger and more destructive than any flood since. Remember, it killed the entire human race except for Noah and his family.

12) How did Noah know that all of the high mountains were covered?
Since God never said that they would be, this is evidence that the account is from Noah's perspective (Gen. 8:5-6 & 13). See 7 above.

13) How did Noah know that all of the land animals and birds had died?
First, God said that they would (Gen. 6:7, 13 & 17; 7:4). Second, Noah could see the waters had flooded everything (Gen. 8:6). Therefore, the animals would have drowned. Lastly, after the flood Noah would not have found any other animals besides the ones on the ark.

14) How did Noah know that the fountains of the deep had closed?
He probably saw the waters bursting forth at the same time that the rains began (Gen 7:10-12). So when the rains stopped, he probably assumed God had finished increasing all of the waters (Gen. 7:17; 8:6-7)

15) How did Noah know that the flood was over?
Noah knew it was over because of his eyes and the actions of a bird (Gen. 8:5-13). It was not divine revelation, because God did not speak to him until after this. Even then it was only to give him permission to leave the ark and to say be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 8:15-17).

As can be seen, the young earth objections do not "hold water." All of them have Biblical and logical answers.

I have no idea why a face has shown up on number 8.

Anita,

Yes, I remember he also talks about the starlight problem and he talks about the days of Genesis being longer than just 24 hour days, but in that same breath he claims they are in sequential order which is also contradicting.

How are six long periods of time, one following after the other, a contradiction. That does not make sense.

Have you studied Jewish genealogies? They are usually not complete. They are intended to connect the past to the future and/or make theological statments (like Gen. 4 and 5), not name everyone in the line. This does not mean that they are not true lineages, but that they can skip many generations whithout effecting the purpose.

Genesis 4 and five are set as opposing lines (righteous and unrighteous). This is clear from the meanings of the names and the characteristics of the people. They are about the two seeds mentioned in Genesis 3. So, these two genealogies are being highly selective in who was included.

Luke 3:36 gives us a name not found in Genesis 11, Cainan. This is enough to show that that genealogy is incomplete. And, yes that Cainan does belong in Luke. I've collected copies of all know manuscripts containing Luke 3:36-38 from the first 400 years of church history. He is there. That is 4 Greek, 1 Syriac, 1 Coptic, 2 Latin and 1 Gothic. I also looked at the church fathers who added up the number of genealogies in Luke. Based on the number of generations they counted Cainan was there. You cannot get 77 generations without him.

Only the second oldest Greek (P75) does not include him. The oldest (P4) and all others have him.

You can not add the numbers to get the age of the earth or when Adam was created.

dayage wrote:
There is no contradiction in believing in an old earth and universe, and not believing in evolution.

Except that Evolution...Is probably how god rolls.

The face had shown, because it was the code for a smiley.

"Now Rick, when the bible says it took six days to create the earth, I tend to believe it did!"
Anita, I also believe the Bible when it says God created the heavens and the Earth in six days......six long days. That is where you fail to understand OEC. I understand that you believe in a young earth interpretation. That isn't where the problem is. The problem is that you are spelling God as G-d as not to misuse the Lord's name, but you are breaking one of God's commandments by giving a false witness against your neighbors by misrepresenting what OECs believe.

The only deception here is not fully believing the Bible - that Genesis is describing single 24 hours days!

Here is where I have a problem with what you posted. You are saying that OECs don't fully believe the Bible.

Look, I fully understand Rick. I just do not agree. I am at the mature point right now in my life where I've decided that if I am going to believe the Bible, it is going to be by its literal word. None of this wishy-washy business. I take it at face value - G-d's word! So far I've learned that the later is always prerequisite to the former.

OECs also believe in a literal translation of the creation accounts in the Bible. You are misrepresenting OECs again. Anita, I don't wish to argue old earth vs. young earth. I just wish you would make your points honestly, without misrepresenting the side you are debating with. Too many times I've seen people misrepresenting someone's side. Someone here once said that in order to argue against something, we should know the subject well enough to defend it. I don't agree with most of what YECs believe, but I don't need to misrepresent their point of view.

Believing the literal interpretation of the bible means believing the world is flat, Anne do you believe that or do you interpret that in a different manner than as literally intended? The world SO obviously has FOUR CORNERS.

ps. i know you are ignoring my posts, GJ ignorance is Grrreat!