ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

What If Big Bang Is True

If the LHC "proves" the Big Bang of unmpteen million years ago, will this affect your belief in God and your Christian Faith?

Moderator - Evolution would never be true whether I was a Christian or not.

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---alan_of_UK on 9/11/08
     Helpful Blog Vote (11)

Post a New Blog



Has anyone seen Lee lately?
---jerry6593 on 2/24/09


Now then if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, then you shall be my own possession among all the peoples, FOR ALL THE EARTH IS MINE. [Exodus 19:5].
---catherine on 2/13/09


Alan we are advised never to swim in the harbour, or ocean at dusk. However yesterday after a long hot run I went into the lovely water to coll off. It was dusk and I had to admit I was a little nervous.

I once met a very large shark when spear-fishing on the Grand Recif off New Caledonia. It was about 4 metres long and came very close for a look. Fortunately it left when I punched it in the nose. Exciting!

Nonetheless the statistics show you are more likely to be killed crossing the road, slipping in the shower or by argueing with a woman in the kitchen.
---Warwick on 2/13/09


Thanks for that, Warwick.

I enjoy swimming in the sea, but don't think I will come to your neighbourhood to do that!
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/13/09


Laurie it puzzles me but I see it this way.

Some read what Scripture says but wonder if it means something else. That's their nature. They doubt anything and everything.

Some quickly see the error of their ways when someone points out the consquences. Others won't give up on pet ideas no matter what God or man writes.

Others have been indoctrinated in some way or other and come to Scripture with non-Biblical, or anti-Biblical ideas already in mind. They see what Scripture says, but cannot accept it at face value (even if Jesus did) because they already 'know' it can't mean that.

Some here have admitted their anti-Biblical views come from such compromisers as Hugh Ross. He is their authority, not God's word. Sadly.
---Warwick on 2/12/09




Alan Dorothea MacKellar wrote a poem called 'My Country' which includes

'I love a sunburnt country, a land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,of droughts and flooding rains.
I love her far horizons, I love her jewel-sea,
Her beauty and her terror-the wide brown land for me'

........For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.'

Google and read it all.It cuts me to the heart!

We do have horrific bush-fires and monsoonal floods but not where I live. We also have scores of sharks in the harbour 400 metres from where I live, and people have recently been attacked.

We will survive, and be strengthened by this.
---Warwick on 2/12/09


Warwick ...
That comment was to K, after he said "you deny mountain building ... but affirm goo-to-you evolution and billions of years".
I had done neither.

My statement about affirming nothing was of course inaccurate, since I have often affirmed God as Creator and Jesus as Saviour

At the time I said you had not answered my questions, you had not done so. Bear in mind the delay between posting and publication on these blogs.

Your country is in my thoughts and prayers at this time. Have you been affected by the fires?
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/12/09


Warwick,

Sometimes curiosity does kill the cat. I marvel at those who are constantly arguing against what the Bible clearly says, always looking for a natural explanation, and too ready to reject a supernatural one. Why people seem to think God is bound by the laws of nature, which HE created, is beyond me.

I noticed that Lee, who was so set on the 1st 3 days being long periods of time, never said he didn't believe God created the heavenly bodies, fish and birds, animals and Adam and Eve, in 3 24-hour periods. If you can believe the latter, why is it hard to believe God created in 24-hour periods the first three days?
---Laurie on 2/11/09


Laurie you have, I believe, written at least three significant truths:

'Our curiosity can take us in directions the Bible doesn't go.'

'When I speculate, I try to stay within the boundaries of what the Bible does tell us.'

'God has told us what He feels we need to know, not everything we want to know.'

Amen brother, you get my vote!
---Warwick on 2/11/09


Alan you wrote 'I have denied nothing, nor affirmed anything.'

It took me quite a while to come to grips with what you are on about Alan. You seem always to be searching for any Biblical meaning other than the straight-forward view.

Please let us know why you do that?

Is it just a game, for your entertainment?

BTW you have twice said I have failed to answer your questions, but have failed to tell me what these questions were.
---Warwick on 2/11/09




K ... I am not an evolutionist.

I have denied nothing, nor affirmed anything.

Like others, you misrepresernt what I say, probably because you have no answer to my honest questions.

Don't you notice the ???? in my posts?
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/11/09


Alan-can't think of a Scripture which mentions mountains rising. Wasn't it St John who said-If God told us everything which happened the whole worlds books wouldn't contain it!

Geologists agree mountains have grown from low levels but argue about time-frame.

Scripture says the old world was destroyed,(Greek cataclysm) as I already wrote. This is confirmed, as I previously said, by the massive depths of fossil containing sedimentary rock-had first to be 'chewed-up' to then be deposited.

Jesus & apostles verified the OT as sober truth-quoted from every book, especially Genesis. See 2 Tim. 3:16 'All Scripture is God breathed, and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...'
---Warwick on 2/10/09


Alan the flood was God's, the ark made at His command, and specification, the animals selected and brought by God, the waters provided by God, and its duration set by God. Therefore where the ark landed was most assuredly where God ordained.

We have every reason to understand that the post flood mountains were not there pre-flood. Remember Scripture refers to only high hills at the time of the flood. Also as the earth was totally covered in water how would Noah have known where he was?

I dont believe it stayed local as local was gone.

Maybe God painted a large X on the spot! Only joking!

Read Woodmorappe's book.
---Warwick on 2/10/09


Alan of UK,

Our curiosity can take us in directions the Bible doesn't go. When I speculate, I try to stay within the boundaries of what the Bible does tell us. God has told us what He feels we need to know, not everything we want to know.

When people decide they must know things the Bible doesn't tell us, they have no choice but to turn to what their own minds or others tell them. If you don't trust the Bible, you truly have nothing you can trust because men are fallible.

When people say they don't believe the whole Bible, only the parts they agree with, they make Him the God of their imagination.
---Laurie on 2/10/09


So Alan_UK, you deny mountain building because the Bible doesn't mention it, but affirm goo-to-you evolution and billions of years which the Bible doesn,t mention either, and in fact *contradicts*. The logic escapes me.
---Ktisophilos on 2/10/09


Laurie ,,, At least our final paragraphs agree
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/10/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Lie 1-The watering down of Christianity has lead to the belief that heaven awaits good people! This lie has sent many good but unsaved people to hell. You see it in movies/TV- daddy is an unforgiven sinner but when he dies he goes to heaven. How can he be he has never asked for forgiveness?

In Southern Australia c 200 people were been incinerated in bush fires. How many of these poor people were good people, led astray by this lie, bound for hell? Statistically most!

Surveys show most people describe themselves as Christian but reject the idea they have to admit their sin and accept His unmerited favour to be saved. Such an effective lie.
---Warwick on 2/10/09


Warwick ... Maybe it was not you who said it, but it has been said here that it was the Flood that caused the reshaping and resculpting of the earths surface.
You now suggest the Himalayas (and presumably, Rockies, Andies, etc have been built since the Flood. During those 6000 years? Why no mention in scripture?

How do we know when the Bible is man's record of happenings, and when written directly by God?

I suggest that if Flood was worldwide, the Ark stayed local, and came rest on the highest mountain in the area, the highest knoiwn to Noah.
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/10/09


Alan8566 of UK,

The Bible makes mention of the earth breaking up in Gen. 8:11 "...all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." I believe what is spoken of is water bursting up from under the ground, and the canopy of water that surrounded the earth (Gen. 1:6-8) came down. This was not just a rainstorm, it was cataclysmic.

After 40 days, God stopped the fountains of the deep, the windows of heaven (canopy of water) and the rain, and the flood waters remained on the earth for 150 days.

Genesis doesn't say the ark came to rest on the highest mountain, or even that it landed on the top of a mountain, but it does say mountains of Ararat, which could indicate a region.
---Laurie on 2/9/09


Alan2 In 2 Peter 3:6 for example we read that the earth 'was deluged and destroyed' by The Flood. In the Greek the word for this is the equivalent of the English Cataclysm. Interestingly this flood is in Hebrew called Mabbul. This word is only used for this flood.

I am sure God was well in control of where the ark came to rest. The flood was no accident, neither was it by accident that God brought all the necessary creatures to the ark. Scripture simply says it came to rest upon the mountains of Ararat.

Also we do not know if Mt Everest was higher than Ararat then.
---Warwick on 2/9/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


Nick the scientific method hasn't produced theories-the other way around. Theories are tested by this method! If a theory survives rigorous testing, only then can it be described as fact.

I have worked in the scientific field assisting to develop pharmaceutical products. None of these products could be sold until they had passed the testable, observable, repeatable scientific method.

Long-ages/evolution are beliefs which cannot be tested by the scientific method, so remain beliefs.

The battle occurs when people try to promote theories as facts.

Christians believe many things for many different reasons. I prefer the absoulte Truth of God to the changing opinions of man. God is the only authority.
---Warwick on 2/9/09


Lie2 It began with Satan, liar of liars. Sadly many are unwitting, but enthusiastic co-workers with him.

Consider once vibrant churches now 'liberal', no longer accepting Scripture as True history. Did liberals awake one day believing Scripture isn't True? No. What many have written demonstrates it was like rust, beginning in one spot before spreading corrosion throughout. History shows Genesis is the most attacked book, the rust began here, then spread throughout all of Scripture. Those who promote the lie (either wittingly or unwittingly) will say it doesn't matter just trust Jesus. But Jesus believed Genesis to be a true record of history and He knew.

That is why many strongly defend the foundational book of Genesis.
---Warwick on 2/9/09


Warwick ... Indeed it was God's Flood, although John Woodmorappe calls it Noah's Flood.

My queston first question was why the Bible makes no mention of the cataclysmic tearing apart and reashaping of the earth's surface,(and in fact the Bible says "the water receded steadily from the earth")

And if the Ark came to rest on the first land to emerge from the waters, why was it not Everest?
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/9/09


Warwick, The scientific method has produced theories which have led to many benefits we enjoy. No one beats up on scientists who provide us with so many good things. It seems only if science and Bible orthodoxy disagree that suddenly their scholarship is challenged. Scientific method involves preparation, publication and peer-review. You say fossil record supports a young earth. If it does then science would adopt this as true. Sientists who are Christian are solidly behind old earth. You might want to read Dr Michael Behe (The Edge of Evolution).
---Nick on 2/9/09


Send a Free Encouragement Ecard


Lee ... I don't think Warwick wants to be argumentative.

If he wanted to be argumentative, he would have answered my questions.
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/9/09


Lee: "Jerry - see Laurie's comment on what I been trying to state and what you have been willfully ignoring."

Do you mean this one?

"You said often knowledge brings fear of overturning entrenched beliefs held to be sacred. That works both ways, right? You said we CANNOT specify what its characteristics were, which is another way of saying I don't know, and that's ok, just don't act like you brought knowledge about this."
---Laurie on 2/7/09
---jerry6593 on 2/9/09


Why it is important to Christians as to whether there was a Big Bang or not. Does one's salvation depend on it? Please help me to understand.
---JohnnyB on 2/8/09


Alan, I missed your question but will now endeavour to answer it.

The flood was God's not Noah's so it's is no stretch of the imagination to consider God kept them safe in the turmoil. Just as He protected His people when they left Egypt.

Secondly a little research will show experts in the field have conducted research and experiments showing the ark dimensions are perfect for stability even in very turbulent conditions-e.g. see John Woodmorappe's book Noah's Ark a Feasibility Study.
---Warwick on 2/8/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Lee,on what evidential basis do you say 'it is doubtful that even if I did answer your questions, you would ignore my answers or twist what I post in order to be argumentative.'

'Sorry but I view it as a waste of time to deal with you. It is best that we stop posting to each other.' Proverbs 29:9
---lee1538 on 2/8/09

Easy answer Lee, stop championing anti-Biblical human philosophies and you shall hear no more from me!

In reality you have not dealt with me at all. The evidence is that you have refused to give answers and have continued to promote ideas which are contradicted by God's word, the rules of grammar and are not reasonable.
---Warwick on 2/8/09


Warlock - it is doubtful that even if I did answer your questions, you would ignore my answers or twist what I post in order to be argumentative.

Sorry but I view it as a waste of time to deal with you. It is best that we stop posting to each other. Proverbs 29:9
---lee1538 on 2/8/09


Lee, the plain fact, as others have noted, is that you have avoided answering my questions.

I am confident that if you had answers you would rush to give them.

I suppose I am more intelligent than some but definitely of a lesser order than others. Being 'elderly and ignorant' I must be.

Me 'righteous?' Only through Jesus because I have absolutely no righteousness of my own.

I do however have faith, holding to what God says, and trusting Him, not man's feeble changing philosophies. The danger of this being ably demonstrated in how the RCC accepted Aristotles 'science' and persecuted Galileo because of their lack of trust in God's word.
---Warwick on 2/8/09


Warwick ... You say Lee does not answer your questions.

You've not answwered mine:

Warwick ... That (about the continents being rent asunder in the Flood) sounds all very violent ... Would it not have threatened the Ark ... surely there would have been a mention of that, and of God saving them from the violence?

Where did Noah make landfall? If it was on the first piece of land to appear above the surface of the water that would surely have been the Himalayas (there is no biblical mention of mountain-forming episodes since the Flood so they were presumably the highest then as well as now) This conflicts with the general beleif that it was Mt Ararat.
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/6/09
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/8/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


Well, I am glad that it's Lee and not me.
---catherine on 2/8/09


Jerry - see Laurie's comment on what I been trying to state and what you have been willfully ignoring.

She is the only one that has yet to address what I was commenting on, obviously has a few more working brain cells than what you have.
---lee1538 on 2/8/09


Warwick - *My experience shows that people who refuse to answer questions have no answer.

Your problem appears to be one of two things.

First you simply have chosen to ignore the answers I and other have given, preferring instead to be argumentative.

Second possibility is that you have a problem with basic morality in that you seek to discredit the integrity of others believing yourself to be more intelligent and righteous than others.

Proverbs 29:9 If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet.
---lee1538 on 2/8/09


Lee: You can waste more words without saying anything than anyone I've ever known (even my wife). Since (as Warwick says) you are the brain rust (oops! Did I mispell it?), then surely you can follow this extremely simple logic:

(1) Vegetation was created on Day 3.
(2) Day 3 had an evening and morning.
(3) Approx. half of Day 3 was dark and half was light.
(4) If Day 3 were even one order of magnitude greater than today (i.e. 240 hrs.), then that extended period of either darkness or light would kill most vegetation.
(5) Thus, a long (say a million year) interpretation for Day 3 is not at all credible, and anyone who defends such an uscientific position is not credible either.
---jerry6593 on 2/8/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Nick, I showed you had wrong information about cesium 133, also the untestable assumptions inherent in radiometric dating, rendering it untrustworthy. I answered your geology/fossil proposition showing how the evidence 'better' fits with the Biblical flood scenario.

I gave a geologists statement confirming what I wrote is correct. I can put you in email contact with him.

I gave you details of literature produced by dedicated Christian experts.

Are you going to do the right thing and check this further with the available information from these Christian sources?

You have been strongly influenced by non-Christian or non-Biblical information. Are you fair enough, to see what these Christians have to say?
---Warwick on 2/7/09


Nick,

I don't know why you think it's our responsibility to convince the science community of anything the Bible says, but it's not. They're not looking for God, so they would never accept anything that can't be proved using scientific methods.

If you must have that kind of proof, you may have a long wait. God saw fit not to allow mankind to have the technology we have today for thousands of years, and it doesn't appear He's in a big hurry to give physical proof of how He created the universe.

When the Jews demanded proof, He didn't give it to them. I suspect the same may hold true for scientists and unbelievers.
---Laurie on 2/7/09


Lee,

You said the light source on the first 3 days was not from the sun but we can't specify what its characteristics were. That's true, but it's also true that since God separated the light from the darkness, calling it Day and Night and Morning and Evening, it's possible that the light was fading into darkness each day, and this pattern was continued after the sun was created. Notice I said possible, not for sure.

You said often knowledge brings fear of overturning entrenched beliefs held to be sacred. That works both ways, right? You said we CANNOT specify what its characteristics were, which is another way of saying I don't know, and that's ok, just don't act like you brought knowledge about this.
---Laurie on 2/7/09


Nick, I showed you had wrong information about cesium 133, also the untestable assumptions inherent in radiometric dating, rendering it untrustworthy. I answered your geology/fossil proposition showing how the evidence 'better' fits with the Biblical flood scenario.

I gave a geologists statement confirming what I wrote is correct. I can put you in email contact with him.

I gave you details of literature produced by dedicated Christian experts.

Are you going to do the right thing and check this further with the available information from these Christian sources?

You have been strongly influenced by non-Christian or non-Biblical information. Are you fair enough, to see what these Christians have to say?
---Warwick on 2/7/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


Jerry, Lee's form of light on the first 3 days, lit things, sustained life, but somehow failed to shine upon the rotating earth, separating light from darkness, day from night.

But God said there was evening and morning didn't He?

I have asked the brains trust (he says we are brainless)to show where evening and morning means anything other than 24hr day. No answer

I asked Lee to show how day with a number (i.e, day 7 or 7th) means anything other than 24hr day. Again no answer!

My experience shows that people who refuse to answer questions have no answer.

I think it amazing how people who insist they are Christians prefer mans changing un-proven ideas to God's word.
---Warwick on 2/7/09


God being eternal doesn't have days, years or millions of years. Time is ours alone.-
Warwick

Brother, that is what I said.

"If God created in millions of years why not say so? "- Warwick

He did. He created the universe. Stop thinking in OUR 6000 years
God took his time and made it perfect just as it is.

We didn't have the knowledge of that kind of time frame. God would give us what we would understand.

2 Peter 3:9
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness.

I'm going to say it again, stop trying to define time for God. He defines HIS own time. God doesn't have to tell us anything we don't need to know. He is our Father and we are his children.
---miche3754 on 2/7/09


Warwick, I should have added a tagline to my previous posting that would say I would be happy to have someone convince all of the scientific world that the world was created 10,000 years ago. I just don't think it will happen. I have read both sides of the argument. I reviewed some material last night. There is a world full of sedimentary rock bearing fossils laid out in order with the oldest and most primitive on the bottom and newest and most complex on top. There are even sharp lines that delineate times of mass extinctions. Species are in the lower but not in the higher rock as well as new species in the higher rock and not in the lower indicating appearance of new species.
---Nick on 2/7/09


The Creation model does not allow for extinctions. Dinosaurs, sabertooth tigers, mammoths, mastodons, trilobites and all manner of creature found in the fossil record would have carried thru the flood in the Ark and repopulated Earth. Archeology and other sciences have dated human habitation on Earth far in excess of the 4-8,000 BC postulated to be the formation of Earth according to Creation Theory. Jericho is listed as the oldest city and dates back 10,000 years. Scientific dating may be somewhat flawed but I cannot accept that errors of 4 billion years have been made.
---Nick on 2/7/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Jerry - *BTW, did I miss your explanation somewhere of how the day-3 vegetation survived the multi-year, half-day periods of darkness and light?

The light source on the first 3 'days' (period of time), was different than that of the last 3 days (solar days of 24 hours).


And while we know what that light source was not from the sun on the first 3 days, we cannot specify what its characteristics were.

Interesting neither you nor Warwick has been able to address this point. Often knowledge brings fear of overturning entrenched beliefs held to be sacred.
---lee1538 on 2/7/09


Lee: What a contortion! Now do a back flip. ROFL!

You said: "I could care less if the first 3 days of creation were 10 minutes or 10 millions of years..." I should like to point out that 24 hours falls within your range of acceptability. So if you pick that acceptable length for the 1st 3 days, you can go back to keeping the Sabbath!

BTW, did I miss your explanation somewhere of how the day-3 vegetation survived the multi-year, half-day periods of darkness and light?
---jerry6593 on 2/7/09


I believe in the Big Bang theory! God spoke, and BANG! It was there!!! Amen!
---Bryan on 2/6/09


Miche, Scripture contradicts you & grammatical rules & logic. God given logic,the least of these is still useful.

You say God created over millions of years, but He defined 'day' from our perspective (not His)as one earth-rotation, saying He created over 6 of these. You call God a liar.

Don't get annoyed with me for pointing out the obvious. God wrote one thing but did something totally different?

If God created in millions of years why not say so? Is He embarassed because it took so long?

God being eternal doesn't have days, years or millions of years. Time is ours alone.

We are on a 'need to know basis'? Then why did He mention the time it took. He didn't have to lie about it as you claim!
---Warwick on 2/6/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Trav,

1. Sometimes words have more than one meaning, but that doesn't mean you get to apply the one you want. It still has to line up with the rest of scripture.

2. The mountains were covered for 150 days until the water receded. I'd still like to hear someone's explanation of how that can happen in only one area.

3. Again, why such a large ark to accommodate all those animals, if only the ones in that area were to be destroyed?

4. I don't know what you mean by civilizations escaping. Are you trying to say that the area Noah lived in was filled with so much violence that God destroyed them by flood, but Egypt, China, Phoenicia, etc. may have been exempt? I wonder why they didn't record this in their histories?
---Laurie on 2/6/09


Nick the journal exists and is called 'Journal of Creation' it is obviously quite technical so the magazine 'Creation' exists for the layman. Both come from Creation Ministries International. Creation magazine goes to 170 countries! Google them or got to the site creationontheweb.

There are also countless books available on this and associated scientific and Biblical subjects, written by qualified Christians.

You need to do some reading! If you do you will find that evolution & longg-ages are not proven scientific facts but philosophies which constantly change.
---Warwick on 2/6/09


warwick,

God exist outside of what we call time.
He gave us the definition of the week in a way that we would understand it.

Do you think God is going to tell us simple minded humans(compared to God we are) that it took him X amount of millions of years to create the earth and he wants us to worship us to worship like that?
No. God is going to break down the days, weeks, etc. and say "this is how I want you to live, work and worship me"
And God clearly did that.

We must realize, God has us on a need to know basis. He shows us what we need to know when we need to know it.
---miche3754 on 2/6/09


Nick3 a geologist friend agrees with my comments & added:

Warwick, I cannot speak to every anomaly, which might show up. After all we have a large world where unusual things do occur.

Perhaps your geologist friend would like to be the one to put together a coherent presentation at an important scientific conference or publish in a major scientific journal showing that this information should offset the generally accepted data showing Earth to be 4.5 Billion years old. He would become famous if he were to succeed.
---Nick on 2/6/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle/sphere of the earth,And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,Who stretches out the heavens like a curtainAnd spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Well, Trav, according to God's word...God knew the earth was a sphere or circle , after all, He created it didn't he!What does ignorant men 500 years ago have anything to say about it. Do you not know the Bible is the INSPIRED WORD OF GOD...not man's words. AND God's word is not dependent upon generations of ignorance to interpret truth.

The WHOLE CIRCLE/SPHERE of earth was submurged in water....Everything under Heaven is stated again from Peter....how many different ways does it take to get you to see the truth.
---kathr4453 on 2/6/09


Trav: "Egypt marches through,China, Phonecia march right through .....no sudden death by flood."

You've mentioned this 'fact' several times in similar discussions. I am interested to know where you got this information. Also, how do you know when the Flood happened?

"Wasn't known until 500 years ago earth wasn't flat!"

What has that got to do with whether the Flood was global or local?
---Bobby3 on 2/6/09


Trav,

Genesis God said He would bring floodwaters on the "erets", to destroy all flesh
If only local flood, why would God say every living thing on "erets" would die?
---Laurie on 2/5/09

Laurie, believed myself until pointed to facts.
1. Whole world/earth. Hebrew word Erets/earth. Meant land or country. Wasn't known until 500 years ago earth wasn't flat!
2.Mountains covered...the entire region of flood is Mountainous.
3.All Flesh destroyed in this 350,000 sq mile area....other than the animals taken on board.
4.If just one civilization recorded escaped it confirms localized flood. Egypt marches through,China, Phonecia march right through .....no sudden death by flood.
---Trav on 2/6/09


Jerry - *Great, you have finally admitted that the Sabbath has been kept since creation week, and is therefore not a strictly Jewish institution!

You are one that we can always look to for a few laughs!

No where did I say that the OT Sabbath was 'kept' since creation only that the Sabbath commandment was established reflecting back on the Creation.

As someone that has a degree in one of the sciences it is hard to conceive that one would believe the first 3 days of creation were merely 24 hours in duration in view of the fact that there was no sun in existence until the 4th day.

Of course, you have the monkey of your religion on your back and you have to toot that tune.
---lee1538 on 2/6/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Warwick - I could care less if the first 3 days of creation were 10 minutes or 10 millions of years as I am not an evolutionist and have no need to convince anyone. Whatever position you take is merely an assumption.

It is only that since the first 3 days were not governed by the sun, we can absolutely conclude they could very well have been non-solar days of undetermined duration.
---lee1538 on 2/6/09


Warwick ... That sounds all very violent ... Would it not have threatened the Ark ... surely there would have been a mention of that, and of God saving them from the violence?

Where did Noah make landfall? If it was on the first piece of land to appear above the surface of the water that would surely have been the Himalayas (there is no biblical mention of mountain-forming episodes since the Flood so they were presumably the highest then as well as now) This conflicts with the general beleif that it was Mt Ararat.
---alan8566_of_UK on 2/6/09


Lee: "Warwick - no one disputes the fact that the Sabbath commandment reflects back to the 'days' of Creation"

Great, you have finally admitted that the Sabbath has been kept since creation week, and is therefore not a strictly Jewish institution! You even quoted part of the Sabbath Commandment! Will you now start to obey the Commandment?

Your ASSUMPTION that days 1-3 of creation week were of a different length than the others, however, is biblically and logically completely unfounded.
---jerry6593 on 2/6/09


Lee consider Exodus 19:10-16 God tells Moses the people are to spend today & tomorrow(we know what that means don't we?)preparing themselves. And to abstain from sexual relations!!!!

Vs 16 'On the morning of the third day' the Lord came to meet with them. It is obvious God met them on the morning of the third 24hr day but you say this language can mean anything but 24hr day. Let us imagine the days were even a 100 years each. Then there would obviously be no people left would there?

Do you see where your views lead? Once again to language having no meaning.

So how do we know Jesus has forgiven us and will return? If you are right, and Scripture (not me) is wrong, then this could mean anything.
---Warwick on 2/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


Lee we falible creatures can communicate easily. I write-see you in three days, in the evening & any English speaker will know exactly what I mean.

We can do this only because 24hr day has already been defined.

God the creator of language defines earth-rotation day with a number in Genesis 1:5. This on its own is enough but knowing how limited we are He adds a second definer-'evening & morning.' He applies this exact same definition to all 6 creation days therefore they must be of equal length.

He then says our 6 days of work + 7th of rest are the same length days.

If His wording does not convey exactly what it says then language has no meaning so communication is impossible.
---Warwick on 2/5/09


Nick2 the shredding of the continent/s dumped mountains of sediment in the oceans, burying billions of sea creatures. It's reasonable 'simple' bottom-dwelling creatures were buried first, land-creatures later, with those which could better escape buried last.

Creatures are intermingled. At Fossil Bluff (Tasmania) a whale & a possum-like-marsupial were found entombed together. At Bahariya Oasis (Egypt) fossils of shark, plants, crab & dinosaur are together. Being in the same strata doesn't mean they lived together just buried together.

For creatures to be buried, quickly before decomposition occurs, needs a Biblical flood scenario, not slow gradual sediment deposition as in the evolutionary scenario.
---Warwick on 2/5/09


Warwick - no one disputes the fact that the Sabbath commandment reflects back to the 'days' of Creation, howbeit there need not be exact parallels but only the substance or relationship.

Ex 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
---lee1538 on 2/5/09


Nick3 a geologist friend agrees with my comments & added:

1) There is a general order in the fossil record that's consistent with the global Flood, from marine animals & plants at the bottom (Paleozoic-no creatures are simple) to amphibious animals (Mesozoic) to terrestrial (Cenozoic). The latest part of the Cenezoic (Quaternary) is post-Flood.

2) There are many examples of fossil graveyards where creatures have been washed together. And when you see reports of new fossil finds (e.g. dinosaurs), read closely-you will see that usually there is lots of water involved, the animals were buried quickly because they are well preserved, and the researchers are often at a loss to explain why the animals perished.
---Warwick on 2/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Nick one-Genesis says God created kinds-e.g. cattle kind, bird kind, all obviously with the inbuilt genetic capacity adapt to varying conditions. He didn't create species.

People often refer to 'the fossil record' as if it is contained in a column of sedimentary rock in which the fossils and the various strata are in the same order world-wide, when they arent. This column is not complete anywhere in the world, does not appear in the same order, does not have fossils in the same order or mix world-wide.

The flood originated from the fountains of the great deep (Genesis 7:11) causing quickly rising oceans which then deluged and destroyed the world of that time (2 Peter 3:6). This was no tranquil flood.
---Warwick on 2/5/09


I ask a questions Lee with little hope you will answer:

In Exodus 20:8-11 God defines the human week. He says the basis for this being 7 days is because He created in six days & rested the seventh day.

God here uses exactly the same language in describing His 7 days of creation as he uses to describe the 7 day human week.

We also would write this same way if describing two weeks of equal length.

THE QUESTION! On what Biblical or grammatical basis do you insist the 7 days of creation were not the same as the 7 days of the God-given human weeek?

Please excuse the preamble to the question however you demonstrate significant ability to 'missunderstand' the written word, hence the long introduction!
---Warwick on 2/5/09


Samuel -*Name calling is usually a sign of desperation.

Probably true and that is one reason I usually avoid name calling, particularly when it comes to individuals.

The earth rotation has slowed down over the centuries so that it rotates about its axis in some 23 hours, 56 minutes & 4 seconds. Of course, there is no way of knowing how fast the earth was rotating at Creation or what effect the Big Bang God used had on it.

In any case, there is no reason to accept a 24 hour creation day when the source of light was different for the first 3 days.
---lee1538 on 2/5/09


The big bang cannot be proven. I wanted a new truck so I went to a junk yard and set off a big bang hoping a new truck would appear after the dust settled. All I got was blown up junk.

However I do believe in evolution. Many years ago I had an old ford car and it has evolved into a dodge truck. Few more years it should be an air plane. Ha Ha
---Pastor_Herb on 2/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


Nick I believe most of the fossil record resulted from the world-wide flood of Noah. The creatures therein are of a later period than when Adam existed.
---Warwick on 2/4/09 Thanks, Warwick, and thanks for the clarification re:cesium. I would like to propose a set of if- then statements. If all creatures were present with Adam and Eve then they would have died in the coming flood. If they all died together then they would all have washed into common gravesites. If they washed into common gravesites then the fossil record would show a homogenization with all creatures intermingled in death. If the fossil record shows intermingled creatures then the case for a young Earth would be supported.
---Nick on 2/5/09


If, however, the fossil record shows a clear delineation between creatures with the simplest and most primitive at the bottom and larger and more complex at the top then this would support an old age of formation of Earth. If none of these creatures were extinct at the flood then they would have been present as breeding pairs in the Ark and therefore would still be alive today.

Conclusion: the fossil record supports an ancient age of Earth.
---Nick on 2/5/09


When are Biblical and scientific theories regarded as facts?

If you say never unless they can be proven to be facts, you got the right answer.


While Biblical theories (say of the Creation) are based upon interpretation of the Bible often influence by religious bias and have changed over the centuries, scientific theories are based upon tangible evidence or whatever can be observed in nature by our senses.

Unfortunately those that hold to Biblical theories are usually those that will not change their minds when new arguments are introducted.

However, scientific theories are either discarded or modified in light of new evidence as the discipline demands it.
---lee1538 on 2/5/09


Thanks lee for looking out. God bless you brother.

I believe the first 3 days were extended.

God made the Sun stand still for Joshua.
Joshua 10:13(NIV)
So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day..

Peter says God is outside of our definition of time.
2 Peter 3(NIV)
8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness.

Stop trying to human logic.
---miche3754 on 2/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


"Question for any YEC advocate:Did all creatures present in the fossil record coexist simultaneously with Adam and Eve?"

Yes!
---jerry6593 on 2/5/09


Its sad all I see here is,
Let clean the outside of the cup and forget about the inside!
Well good luck with it.
May God help you.
---TheSeg on 2/5/09


Trav that's not what Scripture says. It says Jesus came to die because the wages of sin is death. That is, because of Adam's sin God passed the sentence of death upon mankind.

John chapter 11:25-27

Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies. And whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this? Yes she said I believe that you are the Messiah the Son of God, who was to come into the world.

By physically dying He paid the penalty God imposed on us,and released us from death. Surely we die but those who have accepted He died in their place, to pay the penalty they deserve, have gained eternal life.
---Warwick on 2/4/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.