Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by billwald, Jun 3, 2011.
how old is the universe?
This article presents a fools perspective. A "fool's perspective" because it takes the position that finite men can correct an infinite God in the person of Jesus Christ who believed the Genesis account as a literal historical account just as much as the inspired Apostle Paul believed Adam and Eve were historical persons and the beginning of the human race by direct creation.
Scientists of past days have made "scientific" assertions later disproved because they did not have sufficient criteria to assert their preconceived chosen philosphical bias.
Those who reject God's Word as the inspired word of God will not believe no matter what kind of evidence is presented or how many times atheistic scientists and liberal theologions are disproven. Again, it is a choice between what God in the flesh asserted as historical reality versus what finite and often wrong finite liberals and atheists assert as "scientific."
Hear, hear... AMEN!
According to the Hubble... about 15.3 billion years old.
Perceived age, just like Adam perceived to be 30ish when he was one day old, a fully grown tree would have had years worth of rings, etc.
Perceived. We "do science" on the basis of observations of our physical world.
Yep. I bet thats what the disciples did watching Peter walk out to Jesus on the water...or witnessing Jesus feeding what amounts to a packed arena with what would be a snack to me.
Looking forward to seeing your science fit into that...
If God could have created a fully grown man in one day, then He could have certainly taken 15.3 billion years to create the universe. He is, after all, God!
There's just too much evidence againt a new Earth belief system - evidence that God Himself left behind.
Yeah, my first clue was that it was from Christianity Astray...er, I mean Christianity Today.
The Same bible that declares God created man in one day states He created the stars, moon and sun in one day as well.
You can't pick and choose. If you believe it took 15.3 billion years to create the rest of the universe when the Bible uses the time frame of a "day" further defined as a "evening and morning" for the stars, moon and sun, then you are forced to be consistent and believe man evolved over billions of years as well because the very identifical time language is used by God's word for the creation of man and thus make a mockery of God's Word, of Jesus Christ and Paul which all view the creation of man in Genesis as an historical actual event rather than some kind of evolutionary development or some kind of mythical, metaphorical, allegorical statement.
If God can create a man fully developed in a single day than He can create the earth, stars, moon and sun fully developed in a single day.
Your issue is with Jesus Christ and Paul who do not view the Genesis account as allegorical but literal, historical and actual.
Mt. 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Mr 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mr 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
Is there a "beginning" where God made the rest of creation over billions of years prior to the "beginning" when God made man?????
Your issue is with Jesus Christ who did not believe in multiple "beginnings" of creation but rather viewed the act of creation of ALL THINGS as a single historical "beginning" in connection with man. It is silly to interpret some aspects billions of years apart from other aspects, thus huge gaps of time that separate when the Bible views all aspects created in direct connection with each other as a singular "beginning" point in direct connection with each other.
I love your argument Dr Walter!
God created a 12 billion year old stage set in 6 days. "The world is a stage and we are actors on it."
God didn't create a 12 billion year old stage, but rather created a brand new world with the appearance of age not the reality of age just as He created a brand new man and woman fully mature with the appearance of age but not the reality of age.
Hmmm... If Jesus and Paul didn't view the Genesis account as "...allegorical but literal..." then why didn't you provide verses to support that position? Nowhere in the above does Jesus or Paul state that God created man in one day. It's just not there!
It is very obvious to me, that based on the 'inconsitencies' in Genesis 1, that Genensis was not written as a literal science manual but rather a spiritual truth.
I am not into twisting scriptures to fit my world view - and it right there in back and white we can read that God created LIGHT on DAY ONE. Then he created earth....and other things....and on DAY FOUR ----
Why isn't this chonologicaly accurate? I can go on...He created fruit trees before he created the living creatures that pollinate fruit trees. Oh yeah the gottcha, new earth appearance of old...sorry.
There is only a problem if you choose to see it. A good layman's read for you that addresses such "problems" is Lee Strobel's A Case For A Creator. It's not twisting Scripture to understand the creation account at face value...it's twisting Scripture to interpret it through the lens of science and darwinism.
I think pollination could wait a day, don't you?
No, no, LOL. I don't need an entire book to explain to me that in Genesis, the author inspired of course, wrote in the text that God created LIGHT on day one. And then created the sun and moon on day four. This isn't a problem for me and hasn't been for others I hope. It's a problem only when we try to find a way to 'interpret' it so it fits into our box of understanding template of reference, so to speak.
But seriously, I do wish I had the book to take a look at what he says, but you have obviously read it - why is the beginning of Genesis well...chronologically challened on day one and four?
I guess you could tell me God created light in a vaccum, ie, just plain ol light without any sun - just light. But that's kinda thin to me...
LOL, yep, one day woudln't hurt here.
I'm on my phone now and not by a computer, but if you truly wanted to understand the position (which I question based on your "I dont need a book to tell me..." comment) from a creationist perspective there are more than enough resources in the archives here and online. The search feature here and google are your friend.