Evidence for God from Science

Yet the dinosaurs prove the opposite ,and according to scientist it seems that the universe was created billions ago.
I think I lost any faith for the Christianity God...I literally have lost faith to even some kind of God

Please point to the part in the Bible where it says the Earth is 6000 years old.

http://creation.com/6000-years


Now please tell me what to believe really,because I don't know anymore ,should I believe this ??? http://www.missiontoamerica.com/genesis ... eople.html
I am really mad right now...

Car wrote:http://creation.com/6000-years


Now please tell me what to believe really,because I don't know anymore ,should I believe this ??? http://www.missiontoamerica.com/genesis ... eople.html
I am really mad right now...

I don't want to read someones interpretation, I want the chapter and verse where it says the Earth is 6000 years old.

Car wrote:Yet the dinosaurs prove the opposite ,and according to scientist it seems that the universe was created billions ago.
I think I lost any faith for the Christianity God...I literally have lost faith to even some kind of God

Car, that you for posting here. Please note that this website holds to Old Earth Creation (OEC). Please see this article linked below:

http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... earth.html

You brought out one major point regarding the literal text point of view known as Young Earth Creation (YEC) as it often can shipwreck people, as you so expressed. Please read the article linked and get back with us. Sadly, there is a very militant branch of YEC that is openly vitriol hostile to OEC so much so that YEC is presented in such manners a cure all for all sins, all life's problems, etc and etc. The majority of YEC are not like this, however, you seemed to me have come across some. So I ask that you takes a hard look at the OEC point of view, and reach your own conclusion.

On this Forum, this topic is being discussed elsewhere now and also has been many times before too. While believers in Christ can differ on the age of the earth, we are still on the same side. There are family disagreements, The age of the earth/creationism is not a mandatory doctrine of the faith. It can and should be discussed as it is not an essential of the faith. You will hear a lot from both sides and even the side that does not believe God had anything to do with creation because of the cosmic crap shoot rolled snake eyes 1 billion times in a row.

So take your time, discuss, ask questions and don't be so hasty in declaring that YEC caused you to lose your faith.

God Bless,

Welcome to the Forum...
-
-
-

car, christianity is not monolithic, so don't paint brush everyone in the same stroke. There is a pretty broad spectrum on ideas which ranges widely on these trivial matters. I think you should take some time getting to know the landscape you want to tread on, its not the same.

The link you provided relies heavily on a literal english translation of the chronologies. My understanding of the chronologies is that they're talking about giving rise to a lineage, not giving birth to a child. But they didn't have Hebrew words to describe great grandchild and such.

Although Archbishop Ussher's chronology has been prominent since it began to be included in the Bible from the early 18th century, nearly all the earlier fathers of the church, no less scholarly, placed the origin of the world at about 5500 BC, making it more like 7500 years old. This was because the ages of the early patriarchs differs between the Septuagint, a 2nd century Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, and the Mazoretic text, which was less accessible and derived from a different version of the early Hebrew scriptures. Interesting, no?

I have a question: what about this from Luke 3?

Genealogy of Jesus

23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, [h]as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of [j]Eli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of [k]Hesli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of [l]Shealtiel, the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of [m]Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of [n]Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of [o]Salmon, the son of [p]Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of [q]Ram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of [r]Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Heber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Now I understand the male dominance in Jewish genealogy...
But there was no genetic code given to Jesus by his earthy father Joseph.
So what does it matter who the father of Jesus was, and his genealogy?
Wouldn't we care more about Mary's genealogy?

I'm tempted to reply, so what? Luke's list of Jesus's ancestors (which is markedly different from Matthew's both in the names themselves and how many there are of them) is present in both the Septuagint and the Hebrew bible. Had Archbishop Ussher carried out his calculations at any time between the 2nd and 16th centuries he would have concluded, with the early father of the church, that the word was formed in about 5000BC, as it has only been in the last few hundred years that the Hebrew bible has been adopted as authoritative by Christians. Bede the Venerable was actually accused of heresy in the 8th century for suggesting 4000BC, as it contradicted the earlier fathers' calculations.

I found my answer here http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ogies.html