Do you believe in millions of years????

[SRA]

???

[Mathews XT Man]

No I do not..the Bible comes up with about 5,000 years old, since man has been here, how long was the earth here before that..?? ask the maker, HE knows!!

[slugshooter]

Yes

[Andrea]

Only God knows how long this universe has been in existence. Man has not been here that long though. Not as long as scientists want you to think.

My question is..................where do the dinosaurs fit in with the Bible? Were they present at the same time as man? If so, were they only on one continent ( without humans) and then killed by the Great Flood? ( and that's how their bones were distributed all over the world?)


Okay, I'm getting too deep.............but that's what I wonder sometimes. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[buckee]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe in millions of years????

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[SRA]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes

[/ QUOTE ]

could you explain why you do???

[Strut10]

No, I do not.

It's more like a few billion...........around 4.5.

[stevebeilgard]

carbon dating says yes.

[huntingbabe82]

[ QUOTE ]
carbon dating says yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

how long has carbon dating been around? no..i do not believe in millions of years.

[OJR]

I believe in billions of years! Millions are easy to trace back with carbon dating!

[Mathews XT Man]

Carbon dating has been proven wrong...an artfact at a 40 year old construction site was unearthed, carbon dated, and was said to be "millions" of years old...LOL

[wtnhunt]

I believe that is a question that only the creator knows the answer to.

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[slugshooter]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the answer I was searching for.

Most everybody on here knows what I believe. That's why I gave a one word answer. I do not like debating these sorts of things in here because all it leads to is name calling and finger pointing. And I would rather keep what friends I have on here rather than lose them over something that is in essence, trivial.

[ParrotHead]

Interesting article today from the AP -

Skeleton sheds light on ape-man species

POSTED: 1:13 p.m. EDT, September 20, 2006

NEW YORK (AP) -- Scientists have discovered a remarkably complete skeleton of a 3-year-old female from the ape-man species represented by "Lucy."

The discovery should fuel a contentious debate about whether this species, which walked upright, also climbed and moved through trees easily like an ape.

The remains are 3.3 million years old, making them the oldest known skeleton of such a youthful human ancestor.

"It's pretty unbelievable" to find such a complete fossil from that long ago, said scientist Fred Spoor. "It's a once-in-a-lifetime find."

Spoor, professor of evolutionary anatomy at University College London, describes the fossil in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature with Zeresenay Alemseged of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, and other scientists.

The skeleton was discovered in 2000 in northeastern Ethiopia. Scientists have spent five painstaking years removing the bones from sandstone, and the job will take years more to complete.

Judging by how well it was preserved, the skeleton may have come from a body that was quickly buried by sediment in a flood, the researchers said.

The creature was a member of Australopithecus afarensis, which lived in Africa between about 4 million and 3 million years ago. The most famous afarensis is Lucy, discovered in Ethiopia in 1974, which lived about 100,000 years after the newfound specimen.

Most scientists believe afarensis stood upright and walked on two feet, but they argue about whether it had ape-like agility in trees.

That climbing ability would require anatomical equipment like long arms, and afarensis had arms that dangled down to just above the knees. The question is whether such features indicate climbing ability or just evolutionary baggage.

Spoor said so far, analysis of the new fossil hasn't settled the argument but does seem to indicate some climbing ability.

While the lower body is very human-like, he said, the upper body is ape-like:


The shoulder blades resemble those of a gorilla rather than a modern human.


The neck seems short and thick like a great ape's, rather than the more slender version humans have to keep the head stable while running.


The organ of balance in the inner ear is more ape-like than human.


The fingers are very curved, which could indicate climbing ability, "but I'm cautious about that," Spoor said. Curved fingers have been noted for afarensis before, but their significance is in dispute.

A big question is what the foot bones will show when their sandstone casing is removed, he said. Will there be a grasping big toe like the opposable thumb of a human hand? Such a chimp-like feature would argue for climbing ability, he said.

Yet, to resolve the debate, scientists may have to find a way to inspect vanishingly small details of such old bones, to get clues to how those bones were used in life, he said.

Bernard Wood of George Washington University, who didn't participate in the discovery, said in an interview that the fossil provides strong evidence of climbing ability. But he also agreed that it won't settle the debate among scientists, which he said "makes the Middle East look like a picnic."

Overall, he wrote in a Nature commentary, the discovery provides "a veritable mine of information about a crucial stage in human evolutionary history."

The fossil revealed just the second hyoid bone to be recovered from any human ancestor. This tiny bone, which attaches to the tongue muscles, is very chimp-like in the new specimen, Spoor said.

While that doesn't directly reveal anything about language, it does suggest that whatever sounds the creature made "would appeal more to a chimpanzee mother than a human mother," Spoor said.

The fossil find includes the complete skull, including an impression of the brain and the lower jaw, all the vertebrae from the neck to just below the torso, all the ribs, both shoulder blades and both collarbones, the right elbow and part of a hand, both knees and much of both shin and thigh bones.

One foot is almost complete, providing the first time scientists have found an afarensis foot with the bones still positioned as they were in life, Spoor said.

The work was funded by the National Geographic Society, the Institute of Human Origins at Arizona State University, the Leakey Foundation and the Planck institute.

[muggs]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well put, and I agree.

[Strut10]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well put, and I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

+1 http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Strut10]

[ QUOTE ]
Carbon dating has been proven wrong...an artfact at a 40 year old construction site was unearthed, carbon dated, and was said to be "millions" of years old...LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

There are MANY inexact sciences.........ALL of them, really. C14 dating is pretty darned accurate.

Kinda like the cardiologist who told me, a couple months back, I had heart muscle problems due to a lengthy history of untreated high blood pressure. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif Read my EKG wrong. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif My BP has run 110/70 (or lower) ever since anybody started keeping track. Stuff happens sometimes.

[JJL]

Hey Parrothead.......................you just wanna answer the question? Quotes are fine, and I'd love to quote you. Here you can quote me.

YES.......... Millions of years are possible, they are but the blink of an eye to God. One million years ago God was experimenting with certain forms of life..............

Democrats..............
Rap Stars..............and....
Keith Richards...............


Even God ain't perfect
JJL

[JJL]

Please excuse my avatar ......that's Hangunnr's doing..............He's a big fan of Hillary

[SRA]

jjl7913....are you a female???

[Shaun_300]

Like some of the others said, my believe of years is more in the billions.

[unioncountyslayer]

NO

[OUTSIDER]

Our lord god is has and always will be, We cannot abstractley think how long he has been here, the question of man being on this rock is answered in the good book, it never makes mention how long he floated it around before he put us on it. Millions, billions, trillions, dosen't matter, we're only here for the blink of an eye. I think the rock we sit on has been here for more than billions of years, why do i think that?? because i can, i've studied all the scientific stuff, i want to beleive it, they just cannot make me beleive that our first ancestors were anything monkey like.

[SaskMan]

Yes.

[dg]

Millions? Heck yea.................

[wtnhunt]

Think Texan hit the nail on the head here. Have felt the same way for quite a long time. I do think science proves that the existence of living creatures on earth did not start 5,000-10,000 years ago as some might interpret from the bible. None of us know precisely what in God's meaning the timeline was for his creations of the heavens and the earth and everything that came about either.

[slugshooter]

Here was the answer I gave to a co-worker last week when we were discussing these matters. Basically I told him that I believe that the earth has been around for billions of years, and with studying Biology for the second time in this college experience of mine, I firmly believe in many things offered up by science that in fundamentalist Christian circles is considered heresy. BUT, I believe that no matter how long ago the Earth formed, whatever evolved from whatever, God had a hand in everything. The human body has billions of cells that all form, divide, recreate, and repeat. It didn't begin on its own.

Here's an interest fact for everyone: Did ya'll know that Charles Darwin did not coin the term evolution, nor did he use it.

[ParrotHead]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Parrothead.......................you just wanna answer the question? Quotes are fine, and I'd love to quote you

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, just adding a little fuel to the proverbial hot bed discussions going on here!

You touched on something in that last comment that really sums up my beliefs. “Even God ain’t perfect”

Now don’t go tossing me to the curb before you hear me out because I’m in no way stating that God is imperfect or being sac religious. Follow me on this one ok

The majority of Christians believe that the creation of man in the form of Adam happened somewhere around 5 to 6 thousand years ago. From reading the Bible and examining the timetables, I’ll agree. Now you go to the book of Genesis and God made the heavens and earth in oh, about 7 days, one of those days he took a rest. And reading more, the Bible refers to a day as a 1000 years so if you put your pencil to it, that puts us somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 to 13 thousand years ago right?

Now we have science to come along and some pretty smart folks telling us that there was a form of man living on the face of the earth over a million years ago. We also have these smart folks examining the fossil fuels and the amount of time it takes for a single dinosaur to decay to the point that it creates a pocket of oil; there again, it’s millions of years.

Ok, now for “my” theory

There was some lag time between when God created the earth and when Adam came along. In this lag time we had several periods that happened and I believe that it was during this lag time that God was experimenting with the final product. You know, basic R and D.

After the earth was created with all its vegetation, God had to create something that would clean the earth or eat the vegetation so he created a few animals. We know these animals today as dinosaurs. Everything was ok but then God decided to go a step further and created what we’ll call “man version 1”.

Of course, God was successful in his creation but lets face it, version 1 wasn’t exactly a sharp tool. It took years for him to finally discover fire, he couldn’t talk, mostly grunted and had atrocious table manners. Hey, the first design is usually the worst design.

So God stood back and assessed the situation. Man wasn’t going anywhere, all these animals he created starting reeking havoc, maybe multiplying too much and generally causing chaos so what did he do? Yup, decided to scrap the whole thing and go back to the drawing board. So what’s the easiest way to wipe the slate clean? You guessed it. Down from the heavens comes one big ole meteor and BOOM, there goes the neighborhood.

A few years pass while God contemplates the design of man and what he really wants the earth to look like, maybe a few thousand or even a million years pass but eventually God gets back to work and he creates and whole new crop of animals, something a little more tamer. I mean hey, have your choice between a dog and a T-Rex and I think you’re going with mans best friend. Course, you can’t be eating mans best friend so God created animals that were for consumption purposes so that when he did create man again, he wouldn’t starve.

Then God created man version 2. Someone in his likeness, someone just a little smarter, a little faster, a little brighter, basically someone that God could relate to and they could relate to him. Someone like Adam.

Course we all know that Eve was created from Adam and was made solely as a help-mate. Course along came the apple tree and we’ve been paying for ever sense but that’s another discussion somewhere in time.

A few thousand years later, you have today what God “may or may not” have wanted to create. Who knows, maybe God’s up there right now scratching his head and saying to himself “what, another screw up?” Maybe just maybe we’re just version releases and once God has perfected the product will release his final version. Who knows, all you can do is believe in God and do as he would want you to and end the end when you do get to meet him, he won’t be too disappointed in the life you’ve lived.

Course, that’s just my opinion – I may be wrong.

[Bowhntr]

No. At present the bible accounts for only about 6,000 years. 2,000 from creation till Noah's flood, 2,000 from the flood until Christ, and 2,000 from Christ until now.
I also believe that the dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible and that carbon dating is a flawed system. Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[Bowhntr]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever thought that we might be using science to try to disprove the Bible?

[Andrea]

[ QUOTE ]
No. At present the bible accounts for only about 6,000 years. 2,000 from creation till Noah's flood, 2,000 from the flood until Christ, and 2,000 from Christ until now.
I also believe that the dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible and that carbon dating is a flawed system. Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I've read some references to creatures that are really big, but you'd think that with the ferocity of ones like a T-rex---there'd be stories of them in the Bible like there are with lions and fish. That's why I wonder if these dinosaurs existed on a different continent during biblical times. And Noah's flood is what killed them and what spread there bones all over the world.

http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Bowhntr]

Huntin Girl, actually if you will read Job Chapters 40 and 41 the bible speaks of two creatures, Behemoth and Leviathan. Behemoth is a peaceful vegetarian whereas Leviathan is a fiercesome creature. Leviathan is later referenced in Isaiah Chapter 27 as a "piercing serpent". I truly believe that these are a few references to the dinosaurs that are in the Bible

[Andrea]

[ QUOTE ]
Huntin Girl, actually if you will read Job Chapters 40 and 41 the bible speaks of two creatures, Behemoth and Leviathan. Behemoth is a peaceful vegetarian whereas Leviathan is a fiercesome creature. Leviathan is later referenced in Isaiah Chapter 27 as a "piercing serpent". I truly believe that these are a few references to the dinosaurs that are in the Bible

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know. I've read it.

But don't you agree that if all these dinosaurs existed alongside man during biblical times...............then there'd be a LOT more written about them??

[Jimfrompa]

No!

[Bowhntr]

I'm not sure if there would have been more written about them or not. Personally, I don't see any reason that there should have been. Considering the purpose of the Bible I don't see why one group of creatures would have needed more writing time. I mean consider that the life of Christ being just a little over 30 years is contained 4 Gospels and they mostly outline his birth and adult life. You do bring an interesting point but I just don't think there would have been a need to add more about dinosaurs to the Bible. Another thought too, is that only in that last century has man really began using science and technology against the Bible. I don't know the answer to the question.....but I do know that sooner or later I'll have eternity to ask him about it http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ParrotHead]

[ QUOTE ]
No. At present the bible accounts for only about 6,000 years. 2,000 from creation till Noah's flood, 2,000 from the flood until Christ, and 2,000 from Christ until now.
I also believe that the dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible and that carbon dating is a flawed system. Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

True but lets say my theory is correct - do you think God's going to let on to those that wrote the Bible that there was a hugh R and D screw-up before and that these current times 6000 +/- BC is the second go-a-round? I'm thinking he's keeping that under raps......

[ParrotHead]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever thought that we might be using science to try to disprove the Bible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scientists have been trying to disprove the Bible for years. Do you really think that if some scientist were to come out with "proof" that it was all a myth that Christianity would be dead? I don't believe it would, you either believe in God or you don't and what man says won't deter you from that belief.

[mrswtnhunt]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that is a question that only the creator knows the answer to.

[/ QUOTE ]
i agree.

[Bowhntr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No. At present the bible accounts for only about 6,000 years. 2,000 from creation till Noah's flood, 2,000 from the flood until Christ, and 2,000 from Christ until now.
I also believe that the dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible and that carbon dating is a flawed system. Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

True but lets say my theory is correct - do you think God's going to let on to those that wrote the Bible that there was a hugh R and D screw-up before and that these current times 6000 +/- BC is the second go-a-round? I'm thinking he's keeping that under raps......

[/ QUOTE ]

The only problem with that theory is that God is perfect and infalible. So is his plan and his creation....So I can't agree that there was any type of screw up in his plan or his creation. The only screw up was when sin entered the world and sin entered through man.

[johnf]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Texan, I respect your opinion and it has some valid points, but I don't agree with parts of it.

Does the bible give a reference to when creation started or the time span of what the 1st - 7th day was? No it doesn't.

On the first day God said let there be light. There was no earth no stars no planets therefor there was not 24 hour reference. We have no idea the milinia that may have passed from the time light was created till the time the sun and moon were actually created. Nor do we know how long each day was before the earth became a viable planet. Without it's rotatio, there was no day or night and thus no way for man to calculate time.

As far as the bible being correct in it's time-line, there is no reason for me to question it. If you look athe fact that Noah had three sons who all had wives that means every 15 years or so the population of the Earth could be exponentially larger. In the 5000 year sence then there have been roughly 333 generations of people If there were 50% infant mortality and every couple had 5 children (not unusual for agriculturally based cultures) the population of the earth would be roughly 371 x 10 to the 25th power. 3,710,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people.

Now sence we have roughly 7,000,000,000, I would think that 5000 years from the flood is not to outragious of a number.

There are also other books outside the bible that give reference to biblical figures giving the same year of reference.

Carbon dating is as accurate as evilution in it's theory.

[jdickey]

YES! Quite simply.... the "original editors" of the Bible have been proven to have added or eliminated the various writings , gospels, as they saw fit.

Two things on earth that do prove "millions" - DIAMONDS and OIL!

[ParrotHead]

[ QUOTE ]
The only problem with that theory is that God is perfect and infalible. So is his plan and his creation....So I can't agree that there was any type of screw up in his plan or his creation. The only screw up was when sin entered the world and sin entered through man.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey - I said it was a theory and in my beliefs I'll agree with you that God is perfect in every way.

However, you have to question the creation of fossils fuels and the amount of years it takes to create pockets of oil. So either scientists are lying about the creation time OR fossil fuels are not manifested by fossils at all?????

[SUGARKAHNE]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no trouble at all reconciling the scientifically provable age of the Earth and the amount of time referenced in the Bible. The Bible is universally accepted as being written by men. Certainly it was inspired by the word of God, but none the less the actual recording was done by men. That fact alone leaves some areas open for error, misinterpretation, or editorializing by the writer. I think the message contained in the Bible is an accurate interpretation of what God wants us to know in the realm of spirituality, but when we start using the Bible to try and prove or disprove science, we're using it for a purpose that God never intended. It's just the wrong tool for the job.

[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously you haven't done much research if you think the Bible and science aren't intricately connected. There have been many things in the Bible that people didn't understand when it was written but science later proved correct. For instance, in Job 26:7 it says God hung the earth upon nothing. At the point of time when that was written there were many different theories on how the earth was suspended. Some people actually thought that the earth was on the back of a giant seaturtle. However, hundreds of years later, it was discovered that the earth actually did hang on nothing.
Another example is in Job 38:16. It talks about springs in the sea. Also at that time people knew nothing about ocean currents. In fact, it was because of this Bible verse that ocean currents were discovered.
Here is more scientifically proven evidence that the earth is young. One is the receding moon. The moon is moving away from Earth at about 2 inches per year. If you calculate the time and distance just 2 billion years ago the moon and Earth would've been touching. If the Earth was 5 billion years old the the moon should be far out of sight right now.
And for you that wonder about the time involved in petroleum, an article in "US News and World Report" says,"that in the Gulf of California, the action of hot vents was turning dead plankton in the sediment into petroleum-a process that normally takes at least 10 million years squeezed into an instant."
Sorry this is so long, but I also want to say that I believe EVERY SINGLE WORD in the King James Version is exactly what God said. The recording was done by men, but they were inspired by God and He told them exactly what to write, it's not just a general interpretation of His message. If it was, then He wouldn't have told us to not to change one jot or tittle of it. Just my views on this subject.

[jdickey]

This bit of information from the American Museum of Natural History....

DIAMONDS (http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/diamonds/found.html)

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously you haven't done much research if you think the Bible and science aren't intricately connected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm certainly not a Bible scholar or even a theologian, but I do know this much. If I need to repair my microwave oven, I'm not going to look in the Bible for instructions. However, if I need to repair my life or my faith, the Bible is exactly where I need to look for answers.

[muggs]

[ QUOTE ]
Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here in lies the problem. I don't understand why Religions always take a defensive stance. Why is science attempting to "disprove God's perfect word."

What if science is only further explaining God's creation? I think its fair to say the Bible cannot completely explain something so far advanced as the cosmos and how mankind relates to it all.

What if the Bible was intended to explain the world to man, using examples and metaphors? Now that mankind is increasing its knowledge, what if scienctific discovery is actually bring us closer to God and further explains what his intentions are?

I know its human nature to immediately defend what we believe in and fight things that oppose our beliefs...but really, what if we're fighting over this issue for the wrong reasons.

Don't fear the uncertain just because someone told you to. That sort of thinking is not condusive to progress.

[slugshooter]

You would be surprised at how many scientists there are that believe in the earth being billions of years old, as well as believe that God is the creator of all things.

[Bowhntr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here in lies the problem. I don't understand why Religions always take a defensive stance. Why is science attempting to "disprove God's perfect word."

What if science is only further explaining God's creation? I think its fair to say the Bible cannot completely explain something so far advanced as the cosmos and how mankind relates to it all.

What if the Bible was intended to explain the world to man, using examples and metaphors? Now that mankind is increasing its knowledge, what if scienctific discovery is actually bring us closer to God and further explains what his intentions are?

I know its human nature to immediately defend what we believe in and fight things that oppose our beliefs...but really, what if we're fighting over this issue for the wrong reasons.

Don't fear the uncertain just because someone told you to. That sort of thinking is not condusive to progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean that statement in a defensive way. The Bible clearly states that no man can know or even comprehend the intentions of God. I don't believe that science is bringing us closer to God or answers. If anything I believe that it is serving to drive a wedge deeper. It is really all just a matter of faith and what you believe in. I know where I stand and in what I believe. One thing that I have learned from my own experience....if you try to read and understand the Bible without God in your life it is virtually impossible to understand. Once God is in your life and you let him take the lead through the Bible it reveals itself in great ways. Now, I'm not preaching or trying to convert anyone. That was my personal experience and 10 years ago I would have told anyone they were nuts if they said that. Just my 2 cents on this debate.

[shockwave]

Boy someone stirred up the hornets nest, lol, i feel it`s whatever faith you have, if you beleive Darwin, then we all evolved from a lower form of life.
If your god fearing, then Adam and Eve is where we came from, it`s all in what your faith is..

[slugshooter]

[ QUOTE ]
Boy someone stirred up the hornets nest, lol, i feel it`s whatever faith you have, if you beleive Darwin, then we all evolved from a lower form of life.
If your god fearing, then Adam and Eve is where we came from, it`s all in what your faith is..

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm God fearing, and I don't believe in Adam and Eve.

[SUGARKAHNE]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Boy someone stirred up the hornets nest, lol, i feel it`s whatever faith you have, if you beleive Darwin, then we all evolved from a lower form of life.
If your god fearing, then Adam and Eve is where we came from, it`s all in what your faith is..

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm God fearing, and I don't believe in Adam and Eve.

[/ QUOTE ]
Could you explain that? http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[shockwave]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Boy someone stirred up the hornets nest, lol, i feel it`s whatever faith you have, if you beleive Darwin, then we all evolved from a lower form of life.
If your god fearing, then Adam and Eve is where we came from, it`s all in what your faith is..

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm God fearing, and I don't believe in Adam and Eve.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you don`t beleive in Adam and Eve, how do you think we got here ??

[Steven]

Of course I believe in millions and billions of years.

[slugshooter]

Here's some food for thought. In the 17th Century, the Archbishop of Ireland, James Usher, attempted to calculate the age of the earth by using the Bible as a calendar. He picked a point in the Bible that corresponded with recorded history in secular writings, and then worked backwards by using the ages of the people in the Bible, Methusaleh for example, which the Bible claims lived for what, 900 some odd years. The problem with this theory is that the Hebrews of that time played number games. Adding numbers to peoples ages was a way of honoring them. If you see a 7 at the end of someones age, that means they were well liked, it goes on and on depending on how much the person was admired.

[slugshooter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Boy someone stirred up the hornets nest, lol, i feel it`s whatever faith you have, if you beleive Darwin, then we all evolved from a lower form of life.
If your god fearing, then Adam and Eve is where we came from, it`s all in what your faith is..

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm God fearing, and I don't believe in Adam and Eve.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you don`t beleive in Adam and Eve, how do you think we got here ??

[/ QUOTE ]

How we came to be is beyond the realm and scope of human understanding.

It doesn't really matter how old the earth is, or who begat who, or who the first people to walk the earth was. All that matters is that we know that God created it, caused it to happen, and can cause it to end.

[buckee]

The reason those begets are so important, is that they tell us who Jesus is and which line he came from, which in turn tells us he fulfilled all the old testament prophecies that were all pointing to his being born, and dieing for our sins.

I believe the earth is only around 6,000 some odd years old.
I also believe that what happened during the flood, was a supernatural event, and to reproduce what happened in that short time-span, would have taken millions of years to reproduce naturally.
You just can't measure the supernatural. All the measuring tools man has are based on the natural progress of our aging earth.

[slugshooter]

[ QUOTE ]
You just can't measure the supernatural.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But I prefer to not think of God as a magician. Could he make anything and everything pop out of thin air, sure he could. But why would he or should he?

[SUGARKAHNE]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You just can't measure the supernatural.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But I prefer to not think of God as a magician. Could he make anything and everything pop out of thin air, sure he could. But why would he or should he?

[/ QUOTE ]
So how exactly do you believe that the earth came into existence then if God didn't create it from nothing? http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[SaskMan]

There are some very good points in this thread...my favorite 2 being oil and diamonds.

[DSGB]

Yes, I believe in millions and billions of years.

[ QUOTE ]
Two things on earth that do prove "millions" - DIAMONDS and OIL!

[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly!

[johnf]

Diamonds, Oil and things like the grand canyon can easily be reproduced in a short time.

1. Diamonds and oil are said to have been created over millions of years with a certain amount of pressure over all those years. Yet man can create both in mere days with lots of pressure and lots of heat.

Do we then limit God's power to less than our own?

The grand canyon was said to have been created by a little water over millions of years. Who's to say that the receeding waters from the great flood of Noah didn't carve it out in a matter of weeks? Lots and lots of water over a short time would do the same thing.

[SaskMan]

Well thankfully we can produce oil in mere days with pressure and heat, out oil prices are sure to plummet as we'll be whipping it up faster tha the oil industries pump from the ground what took millions of years to create. Maybe someone should tell Bush, he won't have to drill in the wildlife refuge in Alaska after all, we can make it.

Do you really believe that we can create oil in mere days, I mean the kind we're raping mother earth to get???

[johnf]

[ QUOTE ]
Well thankfully we can produce oil in mere days with pressure and heat, out oil prices are sure to plummet as we'll be whipping it up faster tha the oil industries pump from the ground what took millions of years to create. Maybe someone should tell Bush, he won't have to drill in the wildlife refuge in Alaska after all, we can make it.

Do you really believe that we can create oil in mere days, I mean the kind we're raping mother earth to get???

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was cheaper or efficiant, just possible. To answer your question, yes it is possible.

That was a little mean spirited Saskman, not what I would expect from you. You disappoint me.

[SaskMan]

I aplogize if it was alittle mean spirited John. Looking back on it, yes it was. However, my opinion hasn't changed. You say that it is possible, just not as cheap or efficient. I'd like some proof b/c I cannot imagine how producing oil could be any more expensive than how we're extracting and refining it., the same goes for diamonds, why spend all that $$ mining for them if we can make them?

Once again I apologize for being mean spirited, I guess that is why I should stay out of this forum, things get a little too personal.

[BrotherBadger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Once again it is just man tryin to disprove God's perfect word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here in lies the problem. I don't understand why Religions always take a defensive stance. Why is science attempting to "disprove God's perfect word."

What if science is only further explaining God's creation? I think its fair to say the Bible cannot completely explain something so far advanced as the cosmos and how mankind relates to it all.

What if the Bible was intended to explain the world to man, using examples and metaphors? Now that mankind is increasing its knowledge, what if scienctific discovery is actually bring us closer to God and further explains what his intentions are?

I know its human nature to immediately defend what we believe in and fight things that oppose our beliefs...but really, what if we're fighting over this issue for the wrong reasons.

Don't fear the uncertain just because someone told you to. That sort of thinking is not condusive to progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well put. I agree.

[johnf]

Diamonds (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2005-10-06-man-made-diamonds_x.htm)

Biodiesel (http://www.biodiesel.org/)

[SUGARKAHNE]

Good point with those links johnf.

[dg]

crock

[buckee]

[ QUOTE ]
crock

[/ QUOTE ]
good answer http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif ...I think http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif