It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To the believers of biblical creation: Please shift the "act" of creation millions of years back

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Its the timing that is wrong, earth and life werent created in 6 days. Scientific evidence is overwhelming and does not allow this set of beliefs. Yes there was creation, but much earlier and in a different way than the bible teaches us.

That one day, when the first organisms started to exist, happened millions and millions of years ago. I agree, some kind of "force" or "power" is responsible for the existence of life, but it didnt happen as described in the bible.

If you are a believer of creation, why not combine this faith with scientific facts and shift the "moment" of life-creation to the point, when it really happened.

But it doesnt stop there. Before life coming to existence on our planet, there has been the creation of suns and planets. going further back, the ceration of energy, time and space must have occured.

I personally believe in some kind of supernatural "being" that is responsible for the existence of all life and matter. But why, i ask you, do i have to stick to a story from a time, when people knew so much less than today ?



[edit on 13-8-2010 by icepack]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by icepack]




posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by icepack
 


The newest episode of the cartoon Futurama had a plot that centered around the very notion of creationism v. evolution.

It was pretty on target, I thought. The end message had to do with perspective of time between creator and creation.

[edit on 8/13/2010 by eNumbra]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by icepack
 



If you are a believer of creation, why not combine this faith with scientific facts and shift the "moment" of life-creation to the point, when it really happened.


Those who follow science do not need faith, those who follow faith don't want science. Simple as that. If it's going to hurt the persons views, they will just irrationally wave it away with whatever most fits their viewpoint.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by icepack
 


This is really good advice to those who want to maintain their faith but not have their beliefs in conflict with the facts. Many facets of the Christian religion have already done this and adapted their beliefs according to what is evidently true in their God's Universe. Fighting against the truth will never work. God or no God Evolution is a reality, it happened and it is happening. Every generation is a bit different genetically than the last and really, that's all evolution is.




posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by icepack
I personally believe in some kind of supernatural "being" that is responsible for the existence of all life and matter. But why, i ask you, do i have to stick to a story from a time, when people knew so much less than today ?


The only Christians who take the Bible literally are fundamentalists. If you are not a fundamentalist, an opinion such as yours is perfectly viable. Evolution is largely accepted outside of those circles, as is the belief that the Earth is billions of years old, dinosaurs had their shot and didn't make it, and pretty much every other scientific concept that ignorant people throw in your face to try and make you uncomfortable when they hear you're a Christian.

Ala:


Those who follow science do not need faith, those who follow faith don't want science. Simple as that.


Here, we see an ignorant person who is claiming that science and faith are not compatible, in spite of the fact that many scientists are religious and many religious people are quite comfortable with science.

As a Christian, I view God as the greatest scientist of all, and figure that he enjoys the fact that we're "figuring things out."



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by icepack
 


There is plenty of room for mystery and wonder in this universe .....without inventing it .

We are all "seekers " of one kind or another, its just that a couple of groups of seekers settled on a particular explanation 2000 years ago . They now seek to defend this ancient perspective in the face of information that contradicts their beliefs.

What a world this could be if that religious zeal was focused on understanding our Universe better .

Though a theist would probable counter that they are exploring inner space , i believe that journeying into outer space would foster a greater appreciation for mankind.

Our kinship as a species becoming more acute, the greater the distance that we travel from each other . The vast lonely expanse of space bringing our need for social interaction into sharper focus.

For now ......... all we have is each other .



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



we see an ignorant person who is claiming that science and faith are not compatible


Please explain to me where faith has any use in science when explaining something factually.


many scientists are religious


I think it's safe to say the vast majority are not. A survey of the National Academy of Science, which was done in 1998, lists only 7% of them believe in a god. And even if there are a certain number of scientists that believe in it, it doesn't automatically make their position on it any more valid.


many religious people are quite comfortable with science.


I wouldn't use the word comfortable as much as having already made up their mind on the matter regardless of evidence. How many religious people actually research something that would destroy their own views on the world?


As a Christian, I view God as the greatest scientist of all, and figure that he enjoys the fact that we're "figuring things out."


I guess you mean "figuring things out that he created", right? Which part did he "create"? Evolution happens without any supernatural interference. The big bang theory does a good job at explaining how the universe was formed. I suppose you can always say something like "well, what created the singularity before the big bang" and whatnot, and to address that, I'd like to quote Dara O'Brien:

"Science doesn't know everything? Science knows it doesn't know everything, or it'd stop. But just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you."


...and pretty much every other scientific concept that ignorant people throw in your face to try and make you uncomfortable when they hear you're a Christian.


If you go around saying that you don't know what 2+2 is, but you believe it's 17, and someone hears this and says no it's not, and I can prove it, and you're offended, it's not their fault.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
I'm a Christian but believe the Bible is symbolic in regard to Genesis. A "day" before the earth & sun were actually created could be a million years for all we know. In the spiritual realm time is not the same as our time which is based on the earth making a full rotation every 24 hours.

When I was a young teenager I asked God this very question "Evolution vs. Creation". I immediate heard a voice that said, "My child, evolution IS MY creation!" It was a moment of epiphany!

A few months ago I read a fascinating book called, "The Case for A Creator" by Lee Strobel. It really makes a lot of sense and seems to reconcile evolution with creation, especially in regard to the Cambrian explosion. I highly recommend this book for believers and non-believers alike.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockerchic4God
 


If a day was a million / billions years, why not just say it? Leaving it open to interpretation is a pretty weak considering it's supposed to be the word of god.


When I was a young teenager I asked God this very question "Evolution vs. Creation". I immediate heard a voice that said, "My child, evolution IS MY creation!" It was a moment of epiphany!


No, I believe that's called schizophrenia. Might want to get that checked out...


[edit on 13-8-2010 by Whyhi]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 



Please explain to me where faith has any use in science when explaining something factually.


Have you personally compiled and physically examined all the evidence for evolution? How many years have you been doing hands on research in the field of abiogenesis?

Or have you put faith in what scientists have told you?



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by eNumbra
It was pretty on target, I thought. The end message had to do with perspective of time between creator and creation.
[edit on 8/13/2010 by eNumbra]


6 day creation is a fact because time is relative. Depends on where you stand.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Bravo. Perfectly said. One thing that has become clear to me is that a large percent of people who are not religious do not really understand the beliefs of those who are. One cannot assign the beliefs of a fundamentalist to the average Christian. I do not know a single Christian who ignores science and cannot incorporate new scientific discoveries into their worldview - not a single one who thinks the earth is only a few thousand years old or that denies that evolution is happening now, even if they believe that life was created on purpose rather than accidentally. Ironically, a search of topics here at ATS can point out examples of scientists ignoring or denying new discoveries that do not fit into their view of the world.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 



Or have you put faith in what scientists have told you?


Are you implying the science is not valid?



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bagari
 



a search of topics here at ATS can point out examples of scientists ignoring or denying new discoveries that do not fit into their view of the world.


Pseudoscience doesn't count, I'd like to see your examples though.

PS: The scientists view has nothing to do with the evidence he presents.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Rockerchic4God
 


If a day was a million / billions years, why not just say it? Leaving it open to interpretation is a pretty weak considering it's supposed to be the word of god.


He already explained that. The delineation of a day is a man-made concept. It is based on the earth's rotation. Prior to the earth's creation, how long would a "day" last? From a galactic viewpoint, a day would surely be longer than our man-made 24 hour timeframe. By galactic standards, life on this planet has existed for a mere blink of an eye. If you were God, would your clock be set to earth time?

[edit on 8/13/2010 by bagari]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by adjensen
 



we see an ignorant person who is claiming that science and faith are not compatible


Please explain to me where faith has any use in science when explaining something factually.


Faith is my relationship with God. Nothing more. I don't look for explanations of natural events in my relationship, any more than you'd look to your mother or wife for a reason that trees have leaves or apples fall when you cut their stems.



many scientists are religious


I think it's safe to say the vast majority are not. A survey of the National Academy of Science, which was done in 1998, lists only 7% of them believe in a god. And even if there are a certain number of scientists that believe in it, it doesn't automatically make their position on it any more valid.


More's the loss to scientists, then, though you'll forgive me if I consider Steven Jay Gould to be a less than credible source for that sort of data.



many religious people are quite comfortable with science.


I wouldn't use the word comfortable as much as having already made up their mind on the matter regardless of evidence. How many religious people actually research something that would destroy their own views on the world?


I am reasonably well versed in physics, biology, mathematics, sociology and a number of other disciplines, and I have yet to see anything that "destroyed my own view of the world." Quite the contrary, the more that I opened myself up to exploring and learning, the more I found evidence of God. I have a Master's degree in Geography, and yet I managed to get through that ordeal with my faith intact.



As a Christian, I view God as the greatest scientist of all, and figure that he enjoys the fact that we're "figuring things out."


I guess you mean "figuring things out that he created", right? Which part did he "create"? Evolution happens without any supernatural interference.


Who says that I don't believe in evolution? Got a secret for you... even the Catholic Church accepts evolution.

You assume that all Christians are fundamentalists. You are wrong.



...and pretty much every other scientific concept that ignorant people throw in your face to try and make you uncomfortable when they hear you're a Christian.


If you go around saying that you don't know what 2+2 is, but you believe it's 17, and someone hears this and says no it's not, and I can prove it, and you're offended, it's not their fault.


That doesn't even begin to make sense, but I presume that you have a point. Kindly restate it, and I'll be happy to respond.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Rockerchic4God
 


If a day was a million / billions years, why not just say it? Leaving it open to interpretation is a pretty weak considering it's supposed to be the word of god.


So you're saying that you're a fundamentalist? Or a Conservative Jew? They are the only ones who believe that God actually wrote the Bible himself.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 



Are you implying the science is not valid?


So you won't answer my question.



Please explain to me where faith has any use in science when explaining something factually.



faith
   /feɪθ/ Show Spelled[feyth] Show IPA
–noun
1.
confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.
belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

My point is a philosophical one. Many on ATS put there trust in what scientists say, without doing the actual research themselves. They may read an article but do not experience it themselves.

It is understandable, most have busy lives. So we have to take someones word for it.

It comes down to, who do we put our trust in, or who do we put our faith in?






[edit on 13-8-2010 by dusty1]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



I don't look for explanations of natural events in my relationship, any more than you'd look to your mother or wife for a reason that trees have leaves or apples fall when you cut their stems.


Well, I have no idea what that was supposed to mean.



the more that I opened myself up to exploring and learning, the more I found evidence of God


And which evidence would this be? And yes, I do generalize all of the types of religious people into a rather negative category. Obviously there are more than just a single type of a believer, but my experiences in my city, 99% of them are rather what you would describe as somewhat "fundamentalist" and judging from your stance on things such as evolution etc, they would be against you too. My stance really originates from my thought of that if someone is religious, they are at some point, denying science and following whatever fairy tale that most suits them.


That doesn't even begin to make sense, but I presume that you have a point. Kindly restate it, and I'll be happy to respond.


My apologies then. I was trying to explain the idea of someone that is unaware of how evolution, or anything really, works and attributes it to something such as God whereas someone that has a good understanding of the subject knows that not only is that wrong, but even if we didn't have evidence to the contrary, that simply implying God did it is not a reasonable explanation and has no basis. For example, someone such as myself trying to argue something with someone who is a geologist like you that the earth is flat or something of that nature. You're obviously going to correct me ( I would hope ) and if I truly believed it as deeply as some believe in religion, I probably wouldn't be to happy about your remarks, regardless of evidence.

I'd like to hear your evidence for God though.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
The human Species can't understand...


2 different things involved...


a. The Experience... i.e. the Universe (so called) and the Species it is being experienced through.

b. What is producing this. (i.e. The Processing System)


You are only seeing the result and not what is producing this (the cause).


i.e. a Book (involving Letters, words or Paragraphs) looks nothing at all, like the "Story" experienced.

__________________________



The DAY which is described in "Genesis" is NOT the day you think it is....

A Day on Earth (Daytime) is from "Morning to Evening".... Correct ???


BUT... The DAY described in "Genesis" is different in that it is....
"EVENING to MORNING" ??? (Night on Earth)

NOT "Morning to Evening" !!!

___________________________________



Regarding the Heavens...

2 "Heavens" are Mentioned....

It also refers to the "The HEAVEN" All has been Created IN, (the First Heaven which has Nothing at all to do with the Universe) and NOT the Universe as the Human Species believes is suggested.

The "First" Heaven All is Created IN.... Between 2 Faces of a Plane, referred to as "The Face of the Deep"... Nothing to do with a Universe or any other Universes...

The "Second" Heaven is between the Earth & The Outer.... Now this Heaven is to do with the Sun, Moon, and Stars you see...

________________________________



Regarding Time.....

Just because we can write a book referring to a past, the book dose Not have to have existed as long as the history within such a book...

(What we each experience is from “Program Books” within each Soul….)

Nor does a Movie containing an account of history, whether imagined or Not, have to have existed the same period of time, of that told within the Movie...

So what is shown as being History of X Billion years, does Not say that such record has existed for X Billion years... In referring to "Program Books" of the Soul…

Consider a History like being told of, in an online video game ???

In other words the history is more like the "Introduction" to the Game referring to a past time and place (history) the game is based on/in.....

The human species makes the assumption that their experience i.e. of this Program involving 2 Program Books....

a. The Species Program
b. The Environmental Program

is solely produced by the "Contents" of this little Universe when in fact what you experience, is only a "Story" or "Program" being played Inside each Soul (Processor) existing in a huge "network" of Souls.

The Mind or LIFE has Created the Ultimate in "Virtual Reality" Programs, through an "Animation Program" within each Soul...



[edit on 14-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join