6,000 years: can someone explain this to me?

Originally posted by I_s_i_s
Sheeesh!
Jake and Seapeople! Both of you are taking this argument to a personal level. Its a very interesting discussion. Lets all get along...

Btw, Jake..Last time i took high school geometry i knew that the words ends, corners etc are used for 2 dimensional shapes(even a flat circle does NOT have corners or ends) The words dont make sense when applied to a sphere. Maybe the bible shouldve mentioned something about poles or curvature?
Just cuz the bible mentions day/night does not mean that they knew that the earth was round. Day and night was supposed to be god's creation and no one really questioned why it occured.
Question: Is there a mention of eclipses and how is it explained? Curious...

Isis
I agree with you on those words. That was why i posted the original word from strongs in my original post.
King James used the words corners and ends. I cant blame those who translated it though....what english words do we have.

Even today we use phrases like "the dark side of the moon" or 'which side of the earth"
In the original post I quoted where the bible does make reference to a circular earth, suspended in space on nothing.

I think its fair to say that the bible is referring to the 'entire earth' when it says four corners (after looking at the original word).
On a world map, people in alaska live in the top left hand corner while people in Australia live in the lower right corner.

I did not change any topic, you did.

You were defending the bible, saying it stated the world was round. You did this by referring to the rapture, and you quoted verses from the bible supporting your thoughts. Your base argument was that there was evidence of a round earth due to your opinion that the rapture would occur "in an instant" and that there were both night and day references of this. You referred us to Luke as YOUR evidence. You brought it into play. You told us that these verses were referring to the rapture, when you knew that they were not. I called you on it, and I am angry. People believe what you say, because like you, they do not question. You lie, they believe. That is what bothers me.

You continue to post quote after quote, not seeing where you are going wrong. Just because I am very harsh with you, does not mean I am being misleeding. You made another quote out of the bible today. I bet 80% of the people who are christians would disagree that it refers to the rapture.

You also said that I said you were telling the truth and lying at the same time. You called it, "an odd twist". You pulled a quote from me. The quote, taken at face value seems like I was being contradicting. But, true to form, you followed the christian way. You took something WAY out of context. Just like your luke verses. Everyone in here by now knows I do not subscribe to the idea of a rapture. You tried to say that I did. I was clearly explaining your viewpoint step by step for everyone at that time. It wasn't my opinion. It was yours.

You lied in an answer, knowingly. No matter how harsh I have been, I still havent lied.

I think Ive proved my point.

Anyway... back to the original line

I have shown using scripture that the bible presents a round earth

and

The rapture happens in an instant

Let me explain to you, jake, what is wrong with what you have said.

If the answer that I concluded to a question was 104 firetrucks, there might be several ways I came to that answer. If I explained to you that it was because 52 at one station and 52 at another station added up equals 104, it still fits right? However, if I came to the conclusion that since one of the firstations had 40 firetrucks, and obtained 5 more and thats how 52 came about, would it be a lie, if I knew it was wrong? 40+5 is 45 not 52, so my whole argument is a lie.

Wouldn't someone be justified in calling out my lie? Jake, if one of your factors in an equasion is a lie, I should have attacked it. I didnt change any topic. I only attacked false information you brought into the equasion. When you lie about something else, that is not seperated from drawing conclusions from that lie.

You lied to us, and you got caught. The least you could do is face up to it.

In regards to your defense of a flat world jake.

What year was the first model of an earth that is round revolving around the sun proposed?

Approximately when was the last original version of the bible written?

I will get you the answers if you ask.


You have yet to show anything with scripture, nor have you been able to prove a rapture, let alone an instant one from the bible.

[edit on 2/14/2005 by Seapeople]

Original ?
What? Bible?
Book from the bible?

Job is earlier than moses, or a contemporary at the latest.
Moses wrote the first 5 so that puts them between 1604BC - 1484BC.

If you went outside the 66 books of the bible...Im guessing there are some who would say that Enoch is older.


If you are going to play symantics with english words by trying to make us believe that the bible insists the world is flat..it will be a waste of both our times.

Im trying to tell you a fact.

It is a fact that christians MURDERED PEOPLE, MILLIONS OF THEM. The did this for reasons such as, being protestant, and my favorite, believing the world was round.

You know that this still occured as recently as the 1600's? Murder for believing science? Jake, do you believe the world is flat or round? 1000 years ago, the very people who you say you agree with may have killed you for that. That is a fact. It is true history. It isn't like claiming a flood covered the entire world. It is actually true. So tell me, in all of your great wisdom, was it, or was it not man who wrote that bible. Man that did not believe in a round earth until recently? Uneducated man?

This is not a waste of time. We are at one of those points again, where I ask you a simple question, that has factual answers, and you avoid them.

It's been approx. 2000 years since the birth of Christ. There were 4000 years of Bible history before that. God made creation in 6 days literal I think. so that's where 6ooo years comes from. Or some think each day of creation was 1000 years each for a total of 6000 years so that would make 12,000.

Remember when God made Adam let's say He looked 30 at the moment Adam was created. One minute later Adam was one minute old but looked 30. It's the same with creation it was created completeyl formedbut is young.

[edit on 24-2-2005 by dbrandt]

I posted a thread a while ago regarding the onserved explosion of a star. You probbaly remember it.

What happened was several years ago, and explosion was onserved by many people monitoring the night sky. Sanduleak 69 202 happened in 1987. The problem is that it is 179000 light years away. What was observed in 1987 happened nearly 180,000 years earlier.

If the earth is as young as you say, and it was created, as you say, to look old, there are several consequences.

That means that the unexploded star never existed. It was a lie fabricated by god to decieve us into believeing our universe is way older than reality. Why would god do that first off? Second, if you are willing to believe that that much information in the past was fabricated, what about 2000 years ago. If you believe an illusion of something that never happened exists, what if jesus is an illusion. I know your freaking out right now...all mad at me, but with your logic IT IS POSSIBLE. If you believe what you do, you have to accept that.

Originally posted by Seapeople
I know your freaking out right now...all mad at me, but with your logic IT IS POSSIBLE. If you believe what you do, you have to accept that.

Yah I'm actually freaking out so bad that I'm going to bed so I can get up for work and get the kids to school on time. You put alot of your words in other peoples mouths. I very very rarely get mad. I feel sorry for you. Sorry that you think 2 or 3 sentences from you makes my whole world of faith in Jesus come crumbling down. And Sorry that you are trapped in a lie. I'll have to answer the other part of the post later because it could get long.

which topic are we on?

The round earth? I gave dates
The bloody papacy? Not christian
Exploding stars? AIG has a nice 'secular' scientific theory on this. If you cant find it, let me know.

Originally posted by dbrandt

Originally posted by Seapeople
I know your freaking out right now...all mad at me, but with your logic IT IS POSSIBLE. If you believe what you do, you have to accept that.

Yah I'm actually freaking out so bad that I'm going to bed so I can get up for work and get the kids to school on time. You put alot of your words in other peoples mouths. I very very rarely get mad. I feel sorry for you. Sorry that you think 2 or 3 sentences from you makes my whole world of faith in Jesus come crumbling down. And Sorry that you are trapped in a lie. I'll have to answer the other part of the post later because it could get long.

I think you need to understand something about me. I don't really care if you believe in god or whatever. Go worship a rock in the river, and it might make me look at you funny, but really, I don't care. I do however care about the systematic and consistent attack on knowledge.

You stated that you think God created the world in an already aged state. Which means that you believe that our evidence of an older earth is a result of false information provided by god. This extends to our universe. I provided an example of evidence that indicates a much larger age than 6000 years for our universe. I did not put words in your mouth by saying that the past was fabricated. You specifically said it was a few posts ago.

You see, this is truly where the problem is. You provide thoughts on your faith and god. When proposed results of these thoughts, you refuse to think further. You believe in things...along with people like jake, but refuse to consider the consequesnces. When shown the consequences, you categorically deny them, even though there is no way around them. When in private thought, the minute these consequences appear in your own mind, you skip them over. You do not address reality. If it doesn't fit your world of faith and god, then it must not exist. Even if it is logic and reason. That is my problem. Not putting words into your mouth.

Seapeople, one question.

(if) to you, God existed and miracles existed, than could God not place existing stars in (tact) in the universe?



It all comes down to faith, so this argument will never stop until we are in WW3.


peace.

Truth,

I understand completely your point, please don't take that away from me. I just realize the consequences that others refuse to see. If I believed in God and miracles the way you do, then yes of course, I would believe God could create the earth in a state of existing age. I just happen to realize something. If he could create everything in the state of existing age, when do we draw the line. He creates the world with images of stars from 179000 years ago alive and well when they never existed. False images of a star. A false past. Thats kind of deceptive. First off why? But furthermore, and more importantly, my point. Who is to say that false past did not start yesterday? If he could create a false past, and you believe that he did...(Which I am not saying you do), then you would also have to accpept the reality that that false past started one instant ago, and that your entire life is fake.

Thats my point. Just because you do not believe it, does not mean it is not a scenerio that would be very plausible if one believed that god created any false past.

The answer to the star light

www.answersingenesis.org...

Now you have all the answers. The good thing about that one is it fits with all secular data as well

Originally posted by Seapeople
Isaiah 11:12
Revelation 7:1
Daniel 4:11 How could one see the entire world from the top of a tree, if the world was round?
..

In Isaiah God says He is going to gather the Jews back from the North, South, East, and West(4 corners). Same for the Rev. verse. God is using the four corners as a description of the entire earth.

In Daniel if you read the whole thing you find out the tree that grew tall was Nebuchadnezzar and is telling of the fact that he headed up an empire that was in control of alot of the known world at that time.

Originally posted by Seapeople
Jake, are you really as dumb as your post????
Jake, you are an idiot for what you posted. I know I will get in trouble for saying that, but it is the truth. How else would you post such an unthought out pile of horse excrement.

You are a perfect example of why Jesus Christ came. To free us from sin. You have absolutely no respect for anyone.

haugh·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hôt)
adj. haugh·ti·er, haugh·ti·est
Scornfully and condescendingly proud.

Originally posted by riley
Seapeople has consistently given rational arguments coupled with credible sources to back his points of view.. so yes his words carry weight.

[edit on 14-2-2005 by riley]

Tell me where I can find the seapeople posts like this. The ones I read are about his opinion and the ones where he calls people names. That is really something you need to outgrow. If you act like this with strangers I'd hate to see how you treat people close to you.

Originally posted by Seapeople
You stated that you think God created the world in an already aged state. Which means that you believe that our evidence of an older earth is a result of false information provided by god. This extends to our universe. I provided an example of evidence that indicates a much larger age than 6000 years for our universe. I did not put words in your mouth by saying that the past was fabricated

So why can't God make something in it's completed state and PEOPLE look at it and come to the conclusion that's its old, when it's young. How is this false information? God is sovereign and can do what He wants.

I'll apologize now for this next statement in advance if I'm wrong but where do you post evidence other than your own opinion?

The words you put in my mouth was a metaphor for one of your posts where you gave your OPINION and then proceeded to say that "I'm freaking out" because of your post. Last time I looked you weren't in my house so that means you have no idea what I'm doing.

No dbrandt, I just don't have respect for the intentionally stupid people. I have shown you respect, even though you don't deserve it.


Further more, you apolgized for something in your last post. You were telling me that something was my opinion. Let me make this clear to you because obviously you are not as smart as I was giving you credit for.

I never stated that I believed for one second the world was like this. You were the one who put forth a world created in an appearnce of old was viable. I never did this. That was a solution YOU PROVIDED. I only informed you of the consequences of that. It is not my opinion, but a fact, that if you believe that, the consequences may lead you to necessarily believe that you do not know whether or not yesterday really existed. Maybe god created you in an aged state. It really isn't that hard to understand.

I NEVER PROVIDED AN OPINION, AS I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS SCENERIO IS THE CASE. I ONLY PROVIDED THE CONCLUSIONS. It is not my fault that nearly all christians refuse to look things all the way through. If you were doing a math problem with addition and a division in it...lets say 10+6/3. And you divided the 6 by 3 and neglected to follow through with the addition of 10, would your solution to the problem be correct? No. Follow your thoughts through. You stop short in nearly everything. Everything that even remotely implies a problem with your beliefs. Be brave, use the brain your god supposedly gave you.

[edit on 2/25/2005 by Seapeople]