Announcement

Collapse

Creation Science Rules

This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective.
Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed.
1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team
2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
See more
See less

Where does the Bible teach that the earth is billions of years old?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Where does the Bible teach that the earth is billions of years old?

    Nowhere. The Bible nowhere teaches that the earth is billions of years old. The Bible nowhere teaches that the earth is not less than about 10,000 years old.

    The Bible does not teach such things literally. Nor does the Bible teach such things non-literally. The Bible teaches such things not at all.

    Similarly, the Bible neither literally, nor non-literally teaches that Adam and Eve never existed.

    That's why the first post in this thread by a TOL Darwin cheerleader--as well as all further posts in this thread by one or more TOL Darwin cheerleaders--will be nothing but pure spam and entirely irrelevant to this thread. Darwin cheerleaders know well that they have no answers to these questions, and so, anything they might post in response to this thread will, as a matter of course, be wholly a product of Darwin cheerleaders' trolling.
    What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

  • #2
    Yep. The Bible leaves absolutely no room for Darwinism. The sooner evolutionists give up either their devotion to Darwin or their lip service to scripture, the sooner a rational discussion can begin over the evidence.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Stripe View Post
      Yep. The Bible leaves absolutely no room for Darwinism. The sooner evolutionists give up either their devotion to Darwin or their lip service to scripture, the sooner a rational discussion can begin over the evidence.
      So let's say that the Bible is plain wrong.
      Are you capable of discussing the actual evidence?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by chair View Post
        So let's say that the Bible is plain wrong.
        Let's not.

        Originally posted by chair View Post
        Are you capable of discussing the actual evidence?
        Of course.
        All of my ancestors are human.
        Originally posted by Squeaky
        That explains why your an idiot.
        Originally posted by God's Truth
        Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
        Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
        (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

        1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
        (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

        Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Right Divider View Post
          Let's not.

          Of course.
          This is exactly the point. If we are talking about scientific evidence, then the Bible isn't relevant. If you insist that the Bible is literally true and accurate, then you must somehow, at any cost, interpret the physical evidence to match it.

          So if you want to have an honest discussion of the physical evidence- you have to ignore the Bible.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by chair View Post

            This is exactly the point. If we are talking about scientific evidence, then the Bible isn't relevant. If you insist that the Bible is literally true and accurate, then you must somehow, at any cost, interpret the physical evidence to match it.

            So if you want to have an honest discussion of the physical evidence- you have to ignore the Bible.
            Utter nonsense.

            The Bible is God's Word. Whatever is says is true.
            When the Bible says that God created the heaven and the earth... that it true.
            When the Bible says that God did this in six days.... that is true.

            Etc. etc. etc.

            Gen 2:1-3 KJV Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. (2) And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. (3) And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
            All of my ancestors are human.
            Originally posted by Squeaky
            That explains why your an idiot.
            Originally posted by God's Truth
            Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
            Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
            (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

            1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
            (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

            Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by chair View Post

              So let's say that the Bible is plain wrong.
              Are you capable of discussing the actual evidence?
              Why would I bother?? You have no "Actual evidence".

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                Why would I bother?? You have no "Actual evidence".
                To repeat myself: If you are not willing to set the Bible aside when discussing the science, then you are not actually discussing the science.
                There are mountains of evidence- you just pretend it doesn't exist because it doesn't match the Bible.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by chair View Post

                  To repeat myself: If you are not willing to set the Bible aside when discussing the science, then you are not actually discussing the science.
                  False no matter how many times you repeat it.

                  Originally posted by chair View Post
                  There are mountains of evidence- you just pretend it doesn't exist because it doesn't match the Bible.
                  Ah... the good old fashion tactic of elephant hurling...
                  Last edited by Right Divider; October 6, 2020, 12:14 PM.
                  All of my ancestors are human.
                  Originally posted by Squeaky
                  That explains why your an idiot.
                  Originally posted by God's Truth
                  Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                  Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                  1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                  Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Right Divider View Post
                    False no matter how many time you repeat it.


                    Ah... the good old fashion tactic of elephant hurling...
                    If you are willing to set aside the Bible, we can discuss the evidence. The fossil evidence, for example. If you can't look at the evidence without constantly checking whether it meets "Biblical Standards" - then there is no discussion.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by chair View Post
                      So let's say that the Bible is plain wrong.
                      Begging the question won't help your position.

                      The claim is that the Bible is correct when it discusses the origin of the universe.

                      Your "side's" objective is to disprove that claim, not just claim it's false and certainly not to leave it at that.

                      Are you capable of discussing the actual evidence?


                      Are you capable of presenting the evidence in an unbiased manner?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by chair View Post
                        If you are willing to set aside the Bible, we can discuss the evidence.
                        I will be happy to discuss ALL evidence... including the Bible.

                        Originally posted by chair View Post
                        The fossil evidence, for example.
                        What about "the fossil evidence"?

                        Originally posted by chair View Post
                        If you can't look at the evidence without constantly checking whether it meets "Biblical Standards" - then there is no discussion.
                        Stacking the deck is no way to "discuss evidence".

                        Stop trying to tilt the playing field in your favor and just discuss the evidence.
                        All of my ancestors are human.
                        Originally posted by Squeaky
                        That explains why your an idiot.
                        Originally posted by God's Truth
                        Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                        Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                        (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                        1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                        (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                        Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by chair View Post
                          This is exactly the point. If we are talking about scientific evidence,
                          Evidence is evidence.

                          Assertion: All evidence gathered points to the Bible being correct, either directly or indirectly, and while it may not be currently understood completely, there is no evidence that contradicts the Bible.

                          then the Bible isn't relevant.
                          The Bible isn't relevant in a discussion about the Bible?



                          If you insist that the Bible is literally true and accurate, then you must somehow, at any cost, interpret the physical evidence to match it.
                          I could make the same assertion against your position:

                          If you insist that the Bible is NOT literally true and accurate, then you must somehow, at any cost, interpret the physical evidence to contradict it.

                          So what makes your claim more valid than mine?

                          In other words:

                          Saying it doesn't make it so.

                          So if you want to have an honest discussion of the physical evidence- you have to ignore the Bible.
                          Special pleading is a logical fallacy.

                          The Bible itself is (physical) evidence. Rejecting the Bible as evidence (especially in a discussion about how the evidence obtained by doing science relates to the Bible) is illogical, by definition.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by chair View Post
                            To repeat myself: If you are not willing to set the Bible aside
                            When we're discussing what the Bible says?



                            when discussing the science,
                            The OP is about what the Bible says.

                            Meaning we can't "set the Bible aside."

                            No, Chair, we're not going to let you stack the deck in your favor in this discussion.

                            then you are not actually discussing the science.
                            Regarding science, evidence, and the Bible, consider for a moment how many archaeologists, especially those who are considered secular (ie, those who reject the Bible as God's word), keep a Bible handy when excavating in the Middle East. Why do you suppose that is?

                            There are mountains of evidence- you just pretend it doesn't exist because it doesn't match the Bible.
                            There is a literal mountain of evidence that the Bible is true. It's called Mount Moriah.

                            Because if Christ did not rise from the dead, then certainly Christianity is vanity, and if Christianity is vanity, then the Bible is certainly not true.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ancient holy tests aren't part of Science. They aren't evidence.

                              If you claim the Bible is scientific evidence- then you need to prove that it is true- without reference to belief. Can you?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X