The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

bumper234 · 10-01-2014 09:39AM

nagirrac wrote: »

Bet that's the point, isn't it. A "lot" of Christians have no problem whatsoever with the fact of Biological evolution and accepting in principle whatever the latest state of understanding is in terms of the theory of Evolution. That "lot" would be approximately 85% or higher. Its probably roughly the same as any other demographic, if you are counting in the hundreds of millions at least (excluding the millions if not billions who know nothing of evolution, or science for that matter). No mention of that "lot" by safehands though, who likely just wanted to have a pop at Christians in general.

What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things that a small minority of Christians and some subset of Moslems oppose evolution in principle because of the myth of Adam and Eve? Last time I checked no ID proponent has or is threatening a Nobel prize, so they are of no relevance to science really. The only ones who get excited about them are strong atheists who seem to always need some straw man to fight against.

Seriously?

All he said was

Safehands wrote: »

JC, I was watching a wonderful programme called Stargazers on BBC tonight. They showed galaxies which were 23 million light years from Earth. These were scientists and astronaunts. I thought, as I watched it, a lot of Christians actually wont believe these facts, because the thought of anything being 23 million light years away contradicts the stories written 2000 years ago by the intelligencia of that time, before a simple telescope had even been invented.

It makes one wonder.

The worlds population is roughly 7 Billion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

The percentage of those 7 billion who are Christians is roughly 30%

30% of 7 Billion is 210,000,0000

You claim 85% of those are ok with evolution which leaves 15% who still think that the world/universe is 6/10,1000 years old.

15% of 210 Million is 31,500,000

Now i don't care what anyone says 31 and a half MILLION is a lot!

J C · 11-01-2014 12:28AM

wrote:

Originally Posted by Safehands
JC, I was watching a wonderful programme called Stargazers on BBC tonight. They showed galaxies which were 23 million light years from Earth. These were scientists and astronaunts. I thought, as I watched it, a lot of Christians actually wont believe these facts, because the thought of anything being 23 million light years away contradicts the stories written 2000 years ago by the intelligencia of that time, before a simple telescope had even been invented.

It makes one wonder.

Sorry I missed this question earlier.

Creation Scientists accept that the Universe is very big ... just how big is somewhat open to interpretation ... and that applies to Evolutionists too.
As for the 23 million light years ... please remember that this is a measure of distance ... and not of time.
Most origins hypotheses have a rapid 'inflation' phase outside the 'normal' laws of physics (such as the limitations imposed by the speed of light).

'wormholes' theoretically even allow matter to move across enormous distance very quickly .. so there is no issue for Christians (even young-Earth Creationists) with distances of 23 million light years (and far greater distances) within the universe.:)

Please also remember there are many top class scientists ... even some who work for NASA, who are Creationists.

J C · 11-01-2014 12:43AM

wrote:

Originally Posted by nagirrac
Last time I checked no ID proponent has or is threatening a Nobel prize, so they are of no relevance to science really.

As a new 'emerging' area of science ... a Nobel Prize for ID will likely be some time away.

wrote:

Originally Posted by nagirrac
The only ones who get excited about them are strong atheists who seem to always need some straw man to fight against.

The reason that some 'strong atheists' get so 'up tight' about ID (and Creation Science) is because they provide scientific evidence for the existence of God ... using physically observable phenomena ... which Atheists have long believed to be their 'turf' for disproving the existence of God.
We're standing on their 'territory' and winning ... and naturally, they don't like it one little bit.:cool:

... guys like this 'teacher' that Ben Stein challenged in 'class'!!!:D:eek:

... I can't say that I blame them actually ... if somebody had destroyed my worldview (on the existence of God) ... I'd like to think I'd be objective enough to accept it and move on ... I have done this before when my Evolutionist Worldview was destroyed by challenges from Creation Scientist friends ... but it did take me 10 years to do so!!

... so I totally empathise with where some Atheists 'are at' ... and I feel their pain.

Safehands · 11-01-2014 11:46AM

J C wrote: »

As for the 23 million light years ... please remember that this is a measure of distance ... and not of time.
Most origins hypotheses have a rapid 'inflation' phase outside the 'normal' laws of physics (such as the limitations imposed by the speed of light).

'wormholes' theoretically even allow matter to move across enormous distance very quickly .. so there is no issue for Christians (even young-Earth Creationists) with distances of 23 million light years (and far greater distances) within the universe.:)

You are quite right JC, a light year is a way of measuring distance.

It is described thus:
"A light year is 5,865,696,000,000 miles (9,460,800,000,000 kilometers).
Using a light year as a distance measurement has another advantage -- it helps you determine age. Let's say that a star is 1 million light years away. The light from that star has traveled at the speed of light to reach us. Therefore, it has taken the star's light 1 million years to get here, and the light we are seeing was created 1 million years ago. So the star we are seeing is really how the star looked a million years ago, not how it looks today. In the same way, our sun is 8 or so light minutes away. If the sun were to suddenly explode right now, we wouldn't know about it for eight minutes because that is how long it would take for the light of the explosion to get here."

So, If we see a galaxy that is 23 million light years away, that means that the light we are looking at is not the light coming from that galaxy today, it is the light that came from it 23 million years ago. Voyager 1 left Earth over 36 years ago. It is travelling at 35,000 miles per hour. It has travelled over 10 billion miles and it is not yet out of our solar system, but it is still in touch with earth, sending back data about the universe. So the people who built it and operate it now know an awful lot about this universe we live in. When tell us that various stars are millions or even billions of light years away, and that the light coming from them took millions or even billions of years to get here, I tend to believe them. Don't you?

MrPudding · 11-01-2014 12:45PM

Safehands wrote: »

You are quite right JC, a light year is a way of measuring distance.

It is described thus:
"A light year is 5,865,696,000,000 miles (9,460,800,000,000 kilometers).
Using a light year as a distance measurement has another advantage -- it helps you determine age. Let's say that a star is 1 million light years away. The light from that star has traveled at the speed of light to reach us. Therefore, it has taken the star's light 1 million years to get here, and the light we are seeing was created 1 million years ago. So the star we are seeing is really how the star looked a million years ago, not how it looks today. In the same way, our sun is 8 or so light minutes away. If the sun were to suddenly explode right now, we wouldn't know about it for eight minutes because that is how long it would take for the light of the explosion to get here."

So, If we see a galaxy that is 23 million light years away, that means that the light we are looking at is not the light coming from that galaxy today, it is the light that came from it 23 million years ago. Voyager 1 left Earth over 36 years ago. It is travelling at 35,000 miles per hour. It has travelled over 10 billion miles and it is not yet out of our solar system, but it is still in touch with earth, sending back data about the universe. So the people who built it and operate it now know an awful lot about this universe we live in. When tell us that various stars are millions or even billions of light years away, and that the light coming from them took millions or even billions of years to get here, I tend to believe them. Don't you?

But light was faster 10 000 years ago, obviously...

MrP

J C · 11-01-2014 05:46PM

MrPudding wrote: »

But light was faster 10 000 years ago, obviously...

MrP

Exactly, Mr P ... the current laws of physics were created at creation ... and there was, of necessity, a cosmic expansion phase at the creation of the Universe where the current laws of physics didn't apply ... and even the 'Big Bangers' accept that this had to occur ... based on the current observable Universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_%28cosmology%29

All Creation Scientists differ with Evolutionists over is when it occurred.:)

Safehands · 11-01-2014 06:50PM

J C wrote: »

Exactly, Mr P ... the current laws of physics were created at creation ... and there was, of necessity, a cosmic expansion phase at the creation of the Universe where the current laws of physics didn't apply ... and even the 'Big Bangers' accept that this had to occur ... based on the current observable Universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_%28cosmology%29

All Creation Scientists differ with Evolutionits over is when it occurred.:)

JC you use the term Evolutionists in a pejorative sense, to describe the brilliant scientists who designed the space programme, and who continue to monitor their various projects. These are the people who have no doubt that the universe started about 14 billion years ago. These are the people who are tracking newly found galaxies which are nearly 13.5 billion light years away.

Any Creation Scientist who disagrees with them is entitled to his or her opinion, which is usually substantiated by the writings in the bible. The same book which instructed people that it was morally correct to bash the brains out of any woman who was not a virgin when she married, by getting a bunch of men to throw stones at her head.

bumper234 · 11-01-2014 06:58PM

Safehands wrote: »

JC you use the term Evolutionists in a pejorative sense, to describe the brilliant scientists who designed the space programme, and who continue to monitor their various projects. These are the people who have no doubt that the universe started about 14 billion years ago. These are the people who are tracking newly found galaxies which are nearly 13.5 billion light years away.

Any Creation Scientist who disagrees with them is entitled to his or her opinion, which is usually substantiated by the writings in the bible. The same book which instructed people that it was morally correct to bash the brains out of any woman who was not a virgin when she married, by getting a bunch of men to throw stones at her head.

And now he will tell us that "God" didn't mean for that to happen and it also wasn't his words where it says a man can rape a woman and then force her to marry him.

J C · 11-01-2014 09:05PM

Safehands wrote: »

You are quite right JC, a light year is a way of measuring distance.

It is described thus:
"A light year is 5,865,696,000,000 miles (9,460,800,000,000 kilometers).
Using a light year as a distance measurement has another advantage -- it helps you determine age. Let's say that a star is 1 million light years away. The light from that star has traveled at the speed of light to reach us. Therefore, it has taken the star's light 1 million years to get here, and the light we are seeing was created 1 million years ago.

Not necessarily so ... if the light was coming through a 'wormhole' it could be a year old!!!
... and that's assuming that it is actually 1 million light years away, in the first place ... these very long distances aren't measured directly by trigonometery ... they're based on hypotheses that are themselves based on 'long ages' assumptions ... and thus they suffer from a form of circular reasoning.

J C · 11-01-2014 09:14PM

Safehands wrote: »

JC you use the term Evolutionists in a pejorative sense, to describe the brilliant scientists who designed the space programme, and who continue to monitor their various projects. These are the people who have no doubt that the universe started about 14 billion years ago. These are the people who are tracking newly found galaxies which are nearly 13.5 billion light years away.

Some NASA scientists are also Creationists ... and the building and monitoring of space probes is done in the 'here and now' ... and whether the Universe is 10,000 or 10,000 million years old is a matter of speculation.

Safehands wrote: »

Any Creation Scientist who disagrees with them is entitled to his or her opinion, which is usually substantiated by the writings in the bible. The same book which instructed people that it was morally correct to bash the brains out of any woman who was not a virgin when she married, by getting a bunch of men to throw stones at her head.

Creation Science, like all science, is based on observation and experimentation ... and the Bible tells it like it was in the time of Moses (not a pretty sight, in many respects) ... and what it was like at Creation (Heaven on Earth before the Fall).:)

Safehands · 12-01-2014 01:04AM

J C wrote: »

Not necessarily so ... if the light was coming through a 'wormhole' it could be a year old!!!
... and that's assuming that it is actually 1 million light years away, in the first place ... these very long distances aren't measured directly by trigonometery ... they're based on hypotheses that are themselves based on 'long ages' assumptions ... and thus they suffer from a form of circular reasoning.

Sorry JC, That is pure rubbish. You know that! I don't really know what name to put on your reasoning, but you are letting yourself down my friend!

Safehands · 12-01-2014 01:11AM

J C wrote: »

Some NASA scientists are also Creationists ... and the building and monitoring of space probes is done in the 'here and now' ... and whether the Universe is 10,000 or 10,000 million years old is a matter of speculation.

No its not. That is like saying whether it is 1000 years old or a million years old is speculation. Only in your head JC.

J C wrote: »

Science, like all science, is based on observation and experimentation ... and the Bible tells it like it was in the time of Moses

Yes, and it tells us men to whack girls who step out of line with heavy stones, until their brains a reduced to pulp. Great rules to follow JC!

J C · 12-01-2014 02:31AM

Safehands wrote: »

No its not. That is like saying whether it is 1000 years old or a million years old is speculation. Only in your head JC.

... and in the heads of Evolutionists as well.:)

Safehands wrote: »

Yes, and it tells us men to whack girls who step out of line with heavy stones, until their brains a reduced to pulp. Great rules to follow JC!

They obviously were very hard-hearted ... and their Laws matched their hearts.

'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone' ... put an end to that particular bit of hypocracy.:)

bumper234 · 12-01-2014 09:53AM

J C wrote: »

... and in the heads of Evolutionists as well.:)

They obviously were very hard-hearted ... and their Laws matched their hearts.

'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone' ... put an end to that particular bit of hypocracy.:)

What about all of the other hypocrisy and conflicting "rules" in the bible?

J C · 12-01-2014 10:06AM

bumper234 wrote: »

What about all of the other hypocrisy and conflicting "rules" in the bible?

Examples of Human frailty ... and evil ... like King David's effective murder of his military officer Uriah in a vain attempt to cover his adultery with Uriah's wife Bathsheba.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Samuel+11&version=LEB

Very often the higher the personage the more vain and sinful ... and the Bible doesn't protect their blushes.

The Bible tells it like it was ... and this also applies to the account of Creation.

bumper234 · 12-01-2014 10:23AM

J C wrote: »

Examples of Human frailty ... and evil ... like King David's effective murder of his military officer Uriah in a vain attempt to cover his adultery with Uriah's wife Bathsheba.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Samuel+11&version=LEB

Very often the higher the personage the more vain and sinful ... and the Bible doesn't protect their blushes.

The Bible tells it like it was ... and this also applies to the account of Creation.

The bible says a man can rape a woman and force her to marry him. These are the words of your "God" these words were written by men but are the words of your "God"! Or are you trying to say that they went against your "Gods" will when they wrote these words?

jacksie66 · 12-01-2014 10:33AM

This post has been deleted.

J C · 12-01-2014 10:50AM

bumper234 wrote: »

The bible says a man can rape a woman and force her to marry him. These are the words of your "God" these words were written by men but are the words of your "God"! Or are you trying to say that they went against your "Gods" will when they wrote these words?

These are the inter-personal laws that the Isrelites gave themselves and, like all law, they are imperfect and somewhat arbitrary in their scope and application.

bumper234 · 12-01-2014 12:24PM

J C wrote: »

These are the inter-personal laws that the Isrelites gave themselves and, like all law, they are imperfect and somewhat arbitrary in their scope and application.

They are in the bible, the words in the bible were inspired by "God" right? Are you saying that "God" didn't inspire these words? Is the bible not known as the written word of "God"? Has a whole corrupt religion not been built and based upon these words? Are you saying that "God" was wrong and changed his mind?

Brian Shanahan · 12-01-2014 01:44PM

bumper234 wrote: »

30% of 7 Billion is 210,000,0000

You're out by an order of magnitude 30% of 7 milliard is 2.1 milliard not 210m.

Don't worry though, correcting your error makes your argument stronger.

bumper234 · 12-01-2014 02:58PM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You're out by an order of magnitude 30% of 7 milliard is 2.1 milliard not 210m.

Don't worry though, correcting your error makes your argument stronger.

Forgive my misplaced , It threw my calculations but yes it does make the point even stronger thanks

MrPudding · 12-01-2014 03:21PM

J C wrote: »

Some NASA scientists are also Creationists ...

[Citation Needed]

MrP

J C · 12-01-2014 06:48PM

bumper234 wrote: »

They are in the bible, the words in the bible were inspired by "God" right? Are you saying that "God" didn't inspire these words? Is the bible not known as the written word of "God"? Has a whole corrupt religion not been built and based upon these words? Are you saying that "God" was wrong and changed his mind?

These are the inter-personal laws that the Isrelites gave themselves ... they were human-generated ... and therefore imperfect and somewhat arbitrary in their scope and application ... like all law actually.
Indeed the Mosaic Law was described as a curse by Paul in Galatians 3:10-14
10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” 12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.” 14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

bumper234 wrote: »

Or are you trying to say that they went against your "Gods" will when they wrote these words?

Jesus refused to condemn the woman caught in adultery and brought to Him to condemn her to death, under precisely these laws. It wouldn't be the first or the last time that Human Beings drew down God as their witness when they wanted to enforce something or other ... the currrent use of a Bible for swearing in court is a hangover from this era.

For Christians a simple affirmation is all that is needed:-
MT 5:33-36
“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

J C · 12-01-2014 06:57PM

MrPudding wrote: »

[Citation Needed]

MrP

Why do you need a citation?

Are you saying that you believe that NASA isn't an equal opportunities employer (when they obviously are)?

... or do you believe that equal opportunities should only be made available to various categories of pseudo-liberal ... and gross employment discrimination should be directed against everyone else, through some kind of anti-theist 'witch-hunt' to 'out' and sack Creationists ... and indeed, the members of any other faith group, that you don't like the look of?

Delirium · 12-01-2014 07:14PM

J C wrote: »

Why do you need a citation?

Are you saying that you believe that NASA isn't an equal opportunities employer (when they obviously are)?

... or do you believe that equal opprtunities should only be made available to various categories of pseudo-liberal ... and gross employment discrimination should be directed against everyone else, through some kind of anti-theist 'witch-hunt' to 'out' and sack the Creationists?

Do you have evidence of your claim that some NASA scientists are creationists?

PopePalpatine · 12-01-2014 07:18PM

How would someone so grossly ignorant of science get hired by NASA for anything else than manual labour, anyway? :rolleyes:

J C · 12-01-2014 08:01PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

How would someone so grossly ignorant of science get hired by NASA for anything else than manual labour, anyway? :rolleyes:

Here comes the pseudo-liberal ... illiberalism ... and indeed, advocacy of discrimination along religious lines.
AKA ... it's OK to take Creationists tax dollars ... but all tax money collected should only be spent on other people.

Please do remember that we all live in a multi-cultural society ... and such religious stereo-typing and discrimination is completely unacceptable.

Delirium · 12-01-2014 08:07PM

J C wrote: »

Here comes the pseudo-liberal ... illiberalism ... and indeed, advocacy of discrimination along religious lines.

any chance of actually providing evidence for your, as yet, unproven claim about creationist NASA scientists?

J C · 12-01-2014 08:15PM

SW wrote: »

any chance of actually providing evidence for your, as yet, unproven claim about creationist NASA scientists?

NASA isn't like you guys ... they are an equal opportunities employers ... and equal opportunities apply to everyone ... including people of faith ... like Jewish, Muslim and Christian Creationists ... and minorities like Atheists.:)

Delirium · 12-01-2014 08:17PM

J C wrote: »

NASA isn't like you guys ... they are an equal opportunities employers ... and equal opportunities apply to everyone ... including people of faith ... like Jewish, Muslim and Christian Creationists ... and minorities like Atheists.:)

then you should have no problem providing evidence of you claims.

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

Comments