News:

Our Hosting and Server Costs Are Expensive! Please Subscribe To Help With Monthly Donations.

Main Menu
+-+-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 80077
Latest: armchairscholar
New This Month: 3
New This Week: 1
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 890831
Total Topics: 89534
Most Online Today: 520
Most Online Ever: 2999
(Fri Jan 13, 2023 - 21:20:46)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 486
Total: 486
Google (2)

Creation scientists

Started by Amo, Sat Aug 10, 2019 - 12:47:21

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Amo

QuoteI do not do that.  That you think I do is only one more demonstration that you do not comprehend very well what you read.  I do not and have not (intentionally at least) ever  presented what I think is the most accurate, to date, view of the cosmological history of the universe as coming from scripture. That is the stall that you stand in.  The theories concerning the history that I present do not come from scripture.  What I have said is that I do not think my version of such things is in conflict with God's message in Genesis.

Yes, this is my continual point exactly, that your faith is not of or in holy scripture. You look to the "wisdom" of humanity to reveal the "scientific" history of "creation". The speculative observations of Secular Humanists and contradictory extra biblical "Christians", are the source of your evolutionary faith. Not what the holy scriptures, prophets and apostle who wrote them, and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ testified.

QuoteOf course you do. You are a master in that realm. It is your forte. And the is what YEC's do all the time. The web sites such as Answersingenesis reek of it.

No we do not. YEC's are not bible translators. They agree with what every translator to date has determined is the proper translation, which you and yours deny. With no biblical backup, context, or support whatever, in doing so. The scriptures simply do not even hint at what you suggest anywhere at all. Your faith and choice of interpretation are wholly extra biblical. YEC faith is wholly biblically based. Which we admit from the get go.

Quotefor instruction in righteousness not in physics, not in chemistry, not in biology, not in cosmology, not in any science whatsoever.

You do not even realize just how disconnected from holy scripture you really are. As though speaking the truths of God's inspired word, is not instruction in righteousness. Including the plain simple truths of God's word regarding the creation. The verse says all scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: . Why would you think and or suggest that this does not include scriptural testimony regarding the creation?

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.  

The theory of evolution is just a modern intellectual idol of human creation, which many bow down to in place of the plain simple testimony of scripture concerning the creation of our world and universe. They bow down before this faith, and neglect the commandment of God instituted to weekly remind humanity of exactly who God really is, and their real proper relationship to and with Him.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

It is no coincidence that the "Christian" institution which claimed and claims authority to change God's sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, also fully embraces the evolutionary faith.

QuoteAs I noted already and have insisted in the past, Scripture does no such thing, no matter how much you think it does or wish it would.  Nor was it intended to do so. Nor do I use any scripture to support the idea of such things.  You do that, I do not.

I have never used scripture to support deep time evolutionary theory or any other. The holy scriptures do not support deep time scenarios at all. Which again, is my entire point concerning the fact that your faith is deep time oriented, and therefore wholly extra biblical. In this matter, you are of another faith.

QuoteAnd that is precisely what the YECs do.

And again no. YEC's are not the ones imposing their views upon scripture, as all translations to date plainly and simply state that the world was created in six days in rapid progression by the power of the word of God. It is "Christian evolutionists" which question this narrative of the word of God, not YEC's.

If those who profess to follow the light of the world are willing to deny what can easily be seen right in front of their faces from the source of that light, why shouldn't and does the world do the same. To the extent that men now stand before others and declare that they are women, which they most obviously are not, and half of those they testify before accept and believe their false testimony. If the world is not ripe and ready for strong delusion now, when will it ever be?

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Are there not many who look at the creation account, the fourth commandment, and the above quoted scripture, and see deep time evolution? Yes there are. Go figure.

QuoteThe error of the Church that persecuted Galileo and Bruno was to interpret scripture to mean something that was cosmologically incorrect. That is what you do. My description of the cosmological history does not come from any interpretation of scripture.

No, I do not believe, nor have I ever believed as the Catholic Church believed in conflict with Galileo and Bruno concerning cosmology. Why do you bear false testimony against me concerning such? We have discussed this in the past, and you should therefore know, that I do not believe as the Catholic Church believed at that time.

Once again, thank you for admitting that your "scientific" faith does not come from scripture at all. This is the real difference between YEC's and "Christian evolutionists". The former are of biblical faith, the latter freely admit they are not.

Apart from this, you are wrong about the main error the Catholic Church made concerning Galileo, Bruno, and millions of others. God has given all freedom to believe as they wish, even when they are wrong, as I believe you are. He has not given any church the right to judge and persecute anyone, anywhere, at any time. 


 


Alan

Quote from: Hobie on Mon May 06, 2024 - 09:11:48That's a lot of presumption...
It isn't if you take the time to apply it to study and understanding. Have you done that? 

Alan

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52It is no coincidence that the "Christian" institution which claimed and claims authority to change God's sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, also fully embraces the evolutionary faith.

I have never used scripture to support deep time evolutionary theory or any other. The holy scriptures do not support deep time scenarios at all. Which again, is my entire point concerning the fact that your faith is deep time oriented, and therefore wholly extra biblical. In this matter, you are of another faith.


What you continuously refer to as "faith" are facts that have explained the origins of life and matter, those facts cannot be undone and it will be you that looks the fool, if and when you ever accept the truth. 

Faith is believing in a talking snake.  rofl

Rella

Quote from: Alan on Tue May 14, 2024 - 12:15:30What you continuously refer to as "faith" are facts that have explained the origins of life and matter, those facts cannot be undone and it will be you that looks the fool, if and when you ever accept the truth.

Faith is believing in a talking snake.  rofl

I always have.

And I am not a YEC.

And I know the bible proves giants...

But have noticed when one cannot understand things they read they call them allegories. Contrasted to Jesus' simply stating whatever was a parable.... leaving no doubt

Amo

Quote from: Alan on Tue May 14, 2024 - 12:15:30What you continuously refer to as "faith" are facts that have explained the origins of life and matter, those facts cannot be undone and it will be you that looks the fool, if and when you ever accept the truth.

Faith is believing in a talking snake.  rofl

No worse than a talking ass.

Num 22:22 And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his ass, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the ass saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and the ass turned aside out of the way, and went into the field: and Balaam smote the ass, to turn her into the way. 24 But the angel of the LORD stood in a path of the vineyards, a wall being on this side, and a wall on that side. 25 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she thrust herself unto the wall, and crushed Balaam's foot against the wall: and he smote her again. 26 And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left. 27 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she fell down under Balaam: and Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff. 28 And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times? 29 And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee. 30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay. 31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face. 32 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me: 33 And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive.

There are good and evil beings, that are not limited at all, by the limitations you have placed upon your own mind.

There is nothing factual at all, about what you and others think happened billions of years ago. Or millions, hundreds of thousands or even tens of thousands of years ago.

2Ti 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52Yes, this is my continual point exactly, that your faith is not of or in holy scripture.
You do not have the knowledge, the understanding and you certainly do not have the authority to define or determine the faith of another, either to the source or the extent. That you think you do, is more than a little telling about your own lack of understanding of such things, specifically all things spiritual.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52You look to the "wisdom" of humanity to reveal the "scientific" history of "creation". The speculative observations of Secular Humanists and contradictory extra biblical "Christians", are the source of your evolutionary faith. Not what the holy scriptures, prophets and apostle who wrote them, and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ testified.
Anyone who doesn't believe as you do, you consider to be "speculative observations of Secular Humanists and contradictory extra biblical". So much of what you believe and call faith does not come from the holy Scriptures, but from your own scientifically challenged mind.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52No we do not. YEC's are not bible translators.
Yeah, they are and you are. You demand a translation/interpretation of the Hebrew word "bara" to suit your own likely false faith.  Similarly the translation/interpretation of the Hebrew words "yom", "erets", and even "ereb", "boker" and "hayah". And if anyone dares to disagree with you, you declare them to have the wrong faith. Shame on you.


Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52YEC faith is wholly biblically based. Which we admit from the get go.
Nah!!  YEC faith is wholly YEC based.  Even what constitutes biblical is YEC based.  It is called eisegesis.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52You do not even realize just how disconnected from holy scripture you really are. As though speaking the truths of God's inspired word, is not instruction in righteousness.
I am fully aware of the truths of God's inspired written word being instruction in righteousness.  You, however, do not ever realize that God's inspired written word is not instruction in the sciences.  It is you who are disconnected from the truths and reality of the subject and message of God's inspired written word.


Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52Why would you think and or suggest that this does not include scriptural testimony regarding the creation?
I have never said that it doesn't.  However it does not include scriptural testimony regarding science, any science.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52It is no coincidence that the "Christian" institution which claimed and claims authority to change God's sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, also fully embraces the evolutionary faith.


Col 2:16  Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17  These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

You should know, and maybe do but ignore, that in the New Testament (the New Covenant Scriptures) the Sabbath commandment is the only one of the ten commandments that is not repeated in some way. It is no longer binding on the people of God  It is an OLD covenant requirement, and Christians live under the NEW covenant.

It is no coincidence that you who ignore the biblical teaching of the New Testament on the sabbath would pass judgment on the faith of others.  That is despicable and Paul preaches against the very thing you seem to thrive on. 

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52I have never used scripture to support deep time evolutionary theory or any other. The holy scriptures do not support deep time scenarios at all.
And I also have never used scripture to support deep time evolutionary theory or any other. You are correct the holy scriptures to not support deep time scenarios at all.  In fact the holy scriptures do not even address the issue at all.  It is only in your warped YEC mentality that you think it does.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52Which again, is my entire point concerning the fact that your faith is deep time oriented, and therefore wholly extra biblical. In this matter, you are of another faith.
And yet one more time you disparage the faith of anyone who disagrees with you. It is you absolute test of fellowship.  A disgusting and shameful character trait you seem to thrive on.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52And again no. YEC's are not the ones imposing their views upon scripture....
As I have shown already above that you most definitely are among those imposing your views upon scripture.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52No, I do not believe, nor have I ever believed as the Catholic Church believed in conflict with Galileo and Bruno concerning cosmology. Why do you bear false testimony against me concerning such? We have discussed this in the past, and you should therefore know, that I do not believe as the Catholic Church believed at that time.
Only a minor difference in the specific issue of cosmology.  Clearly, you, in the same manner as the Catholic Church did, impose your own faulty cosmology, generally, upon God's word.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52Once again, thank you for admitting that your "scientific" faith does not come from scripture at all. This is the real difference between YEC's and "Christian evolutionists". The former are of biblical faith, the latter freely admit they are not.
The real difference is that your ignorance of all things scientific does not come, as you would claim, from scripture.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 11, 2024 - 09:52:52Apart from this, you are wrong about the main error the Catholic Church made concerning Galileo, Bruno, and millions of others. God has given all freedom to believe as they wish, even when they are wrong, as I believe you are. He has not given any church the right to judge and persecute anyone, anywhere, at any time.
Do you not understand that your condemnation of anyone else's belief in God is precisely the error the Catholic Church made concerning Galileo, Bruno and millions of others.  It is only the specific punishment that is different. The allegation, the indictment, is the same. You are them.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Tue May 14, 2024 - 22:22:17No worse than a talking ass.

Num 22:22 And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the angel of the LORD stood in the way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his ass, and his two servants were with him. 23 And the ass saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and the ass turned aside out of the way, and went into the field: and Balaam smote the ass, to turn her into the way. 24 But the angel of the LORD stood in a path of the vineyards, a wall being on this side, and a wall on that side. 25 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she thrust herself unto the wall, and crushed Balaam's foot against the wall: and he smote her again. 26 And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left. 27 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she fell down under Balaam: and Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff. 28 And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times? 29 And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee. 30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay. 31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face. 32 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me: 33 And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive.
Interesting that you would think that, just as "the LORD opened the mouth of the ass...", the LORD opened the mouth of the serpent.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Tue May 14, 2024 - 22:22:17There is nothing factual at all, about what you and others think happened billions of years ago. Or millions, hundreds of thousands or even tens of thousands of years ago.
Do you not understand that things scriptural is not about things factual?  If it were factual, there would be no need for faith. There is nothing factual at all about what you think about God or things spiritual.

That you do not understand that truth is a sure indication that you do not understand faith. And that of you who are so inclined to ridicule the faith of another. It would seem that not only are you ignorant of things scientific, you are also ignorant of things spiritual.

Rella


Alan

Quote from: Rella on Wed May 15, 2024 - 09:53:11Scientists Found a Startling Glitch in Einstein's Theory of Relativity
Startling for anyone deep rooted in physics or cosmology, not really breaking news for anyone else. 

Alan

#2110
Quote from: Amo on Tue May 14, 2024 - 22:22:17There is nothing factual at all, about what you and others think happened billions of years ago. Or millions, hundreds of thousands or even tens of thousands of years ago.

There is no "think" here, they know full well. If you choose to deny it, that's on you, but it won't change established facts.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Wed May 15, 2024 - 07:37:50Do you not understand that things scriptural is not about things factual?  If it were factual, there would be no need for faith. There is nothing factual at all about what you think about God or things spiritual.

That you do not understand that truth is a sure indication that you do not understand faith. And that of you who are so inclined to ridicule the faith of another. It would seem that not only are you ignorant of things scientific, you are also ignorant of things spiritual.

Disagreeing with you, is not ridiculing you. I'm not the one constantly claiming someone else is ignorant. I'm the one claiming that our differences are concerning our different faiths, not ignorance. I do not insist that those who disagree with me on the questions under examination are ignorant, they are simply of another faith. To the contrary -

2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

People can be very knowledgable, and very wrong at the same time. The school of deep time evolutionary faith has established many institutions of learning based upon their faith, and many are those educated and knowledgable concerning said faith. So they are not ignorant, just of another faith. Which faith, I consider misguided and far more unlikely, short of God's direct involvement in the processes of evolution and deep time universe or galaxy formation. Nevertheless, all such is extra biblical, and therefore of another faith than that taught by holy scripture. The bible itself though, does address one instance of ignorance directly associated with the faith of many deep timers today.

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: 2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

As far as the truth goes, we also have different faiths regarding what is the actual standard of such.

Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

According to my, and biblical faith, God's word is the truth.

Exo 20:1 And God spake all these words, saying,..........
Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

4WD

#2112
Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 09:19:55I do not insist that those who disagree with me on the questions under examination are ignorant, they are simply of another faith.
That is true.  My faith is in God, in Jesus Christ, in the Gospel. Yours, it seems, is in EGW's SDA.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 09:19:55Nevertheless, all such is extra biblical, and therefore of another faith than that taught by holy scripture.
But of course, all science is extra biblical in the sense that science is not the subject of the bible nor is it taught in the Bible.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 09:19:55As far as the truth goes, we also have different faiths regarding what is the actual standard of such.
As I said, my faith is in God, in Jesus Christ, in the Gospel, not in EGW's SDA.

And for what it is worth, I am a firm believer in the Genesis account of creation, even though I am not a believer of your account of creation.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 18, 2024 - 13:07:14That is true.  My faith is in God, in Jesus Christ, in the Gospel. Yours, it seems, is in EGW's SDA.
But of course, all science is extra biblical in the sense that science is not the subject of the bible nor is it taught in the Bible.
As I said, my faith is in God, in Jesus Christ, in the Gospel, not in EGW's SDA.

And for what it is worth, I am a firm believer in the Genesis account of creation, even though I am not a believer of your account of creation.

I quote scripture and the words of Jesus Christ to you as examples of what my faith is in, and you reply with an insinuation that my faith is based upon EGW's SDA. Here we are, go back and repost all the quotes from EGW and or SDA's I have used on this thread as argument of proof of my positions. Good luck with that. If your intention is to falsely imply that my views and or arguments against your deep time evolutionary faith, originated and are held by SDA's alone, your error is blatantly obvious to any who will even give a cursory examination of the issues.

Your testimony and accusations cannot change the fact that your deep time evolutionary faith is wholly extra biblical. This is not my, EGW's, SDA's, or anyone else's fault. It is simply your choice. Maybe you will fond the following article of interest.

https://answersingenesis.org/church/how-reformers-beliefs-affected-early-modern-science/

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteHow the Reformers' Beliefs Affected Early Modern Science

The Two Solas of Reformation Science

Curiosity is a fundamental part of God's design for humanity. That curiosity is strongest when we are children since we have so much to learn about life and the world. As we get older, we tend to lose much of that curiosity as we settle into daily routines and busy schedules. However, some people stay curious, continuing to ask questions. A lot of these perpetually curious individuals turn to the realm of science, which constantly seeks to understand how the world operates.

Though forms of science have existed since the creation of the world, modern science as we think of it today began in the 1500s, most notably with Nicolaus Copernicus' 1543 De Revolutionibus, which argued for a heliocentric view of the universe rather than a geocentric one. While Copernicus' book spurred the rise of modern science as other men began questioning traditionally held, but not tested, scientific thought, his views were eventually declared heretical by the Roman Catholic Church. Unfortunately, many modern scholars point to this incident as proof that science is fundamentally opposed to religion (especially Christianity) and is even superior to it. However, these claims fail to understand the context surrounding the publication of De Revolutionibus, which occurred in the midst of the Protestant Reformation. The birth of modern science does not demonstrate the failure of Christianity or the inaccuracy of Scripture. Instead, the revival of true Christianity by means of the Protestant Reformation was a major influence on both the founding and proliferation of modern science.

The Protestant Reformation began a couple decades before Copernicus' De Revolutionibus when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of Wittenberg's Castle Church in 1517. The Reformation sparked by Luther stretched beyond religious practices, also influencing many aspects of European culture, including science. This influence was wrapped up in what is known as the "Five Solas of the Reformation."

The Latin word solus means "alone," which is where we get English words such as solo and sole. The five solas refer to the Reformers' core Christian beliefs: Sola Christus, Christ alone is head of the church; Sola Scriptura, Scripture alone is authoritative; Sola Gratia, salvation is by grace alone; Sola Fide, justification is by faith alone; and Soli Deo Gloria, everything is done for God's glory alone. These solas are generally considered to be the foundational beliefs proclaimed during the Protestant Reformation. The Reformers held to these five solas and with them reshaped Western Civilization, including Europe's understanding of science. Two of these solas in particular, Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria, strongly influenced both the rise of modern science and the budding scientists of this scientific revolution.

Sola Scriptura: An Attack on Science?

When discussing the Reformation and the rise of modern science, many contemporary historians argue that the Reformers used Sola Scriptura not only to reject scientific advancement but also to attack it. In particular, these historians point out that the Reformers stood against Copernicus' assertion that the earth was not the center of the universe. Since Copernicus' 1543 De Revolutionibus traditionally marks the beginning of modern science, these contemporary historians claim that the Reformers held back science rather than encouraging its growth. However, these claims are largely erroneous and not based on thorough research. Let's take a look at two prominent Reformers who are often accused of opposing modern science: Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon.

Luther and Science

There is only one quotation from Luther that seems to oppose Copernicus' heliocentric views. This comment was made in 1539, four years before De Revolutionibus was published. When a friend mentioned Copernicus' ideas, Luther responded, "Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down. Even in these things that are thrown into disorder I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still and not the earth."1

From this one comment, history of science professor I. Bernhard Cohen infers in The Birth of a New Physics that Sola Scriptura caused the Reformers to oppose science because "even before the publication of De Revolutionibus, Martin Luther heard about Copernicus' ideas and condemned them violently for contradicting the Bible."2 However, Cohen does not accurately represent Luther's comment. Rather than arguing against the progress of science, Luther merely agreed with the science of his day and refused to permit an unproven and untested idea to supersede the Bible. There are numerous accounts of Luther opposing astrology and understanding the importance of medical advancement, and there are no other known quotations of Luther rejecting either Copernicus or other scientific ideas. Thus, it is certainly a stretch to say that Martin Luther opposed scientific advancement.

Melanchthon and Science

Besides Luther, historians often accuse the Reformer Philip Melanchthon of opposing advances in science. For example, history and science philosopher Thomas Kuhn asserts in The Copernican Revolution that Melanchthon wrote against Copernicus' theory in his 1549 Initia Doctrinae Physicae, including in this writing "a number of anti-Copernican Biblical passages" and even a suggestion "that severe measures be taken to restrain the Copernicans."3 Kuhn thus indicates that Melanchthon's devotion to Sola Scriptura hindered modern science. However, though Melanchthon did disagree with the specific theories of Copernicus, he was not opposed to science; instead, Melanchthon's belief in Sola Scriptura actually strengthened his pursuit of science. Much of this can be seen in Melanchthon's works included in Corpus Reformatorum, a large collection of writings by Reformers. Unfortunately, no English translation of this compendium currently exists; however, historians who have perused it have noted that Melanchthon did not oppose science.

According to science historian Bruce Moran in "The Universe of Philip Melanchthon," while the Catholic Church stressed a threefold nature of knowledge, Melanchthon declared that Christians had "a fourth precept of certainty, namely, divine revelation," which was a part of the natural light of knowledge. Therefore, since divine revelation was a part of knowledge, Melanchthon believed that philosophy and science were "legitimate instruments in the pursuit of divine knowledge."4

Not only did Sola Scriptura encourage Melanchthon's support of science, but it also strengthened his support of science's growth. Because Melanchthon believed that Sola Scriptura emphasized verifying truth rather than merely assuming it to be true, he held a deep interest in astronomy and other sciences. Melanchthon's attachment to science was so great that he was even willing to support ideas opposed to his own. For example, he actively supported the Wittenberg professors Erasmus Reinhold and Georg Joachim Rheticus, who both agreed with Copernican views of the universe. Melanchthon helped Reinhold publish his Copernican-based Tabulae Prutenicae in 1551, while Rheticus included the Copernican system in his 1540 Narration Prima, which finally persuaded Copernicus to publish De Revolutionibus the next year. Since De Revolutionibus is traditionally accepted as the spark of the scientific revolution, Melanchthon, by supporting Rheticus, indirectly helped usher in this great revolution. Clearly, Melanchthon's belief in Sola Scriptura encouraged him to support science and aid in its growth.

Soli Deo Gloria: Science for the Glory of God

While Sola Scriptura emphasized trust in the Bible, Soli Deo Gloria emphasized that everything can and should be done for God's glory. Up until that point, the Roman Catholic Church emphasized that science should only be studied to know more about God. While this approach to science has honorable intentions, science can also reveal many things about ourselves and the world around us. By limiting scientific study to only learning about God, the Catholic Church unintentionally hindered scientific advancement.

With the dawn of the Protestant Reformation, the Reformers began to see science in a new light. As they studied the Scriptures, the Reformers read Paul's exhortation in 1 Corinthians 10:31, "Whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." From this verse came Soli Deo Gloria, that everything should be done for God's glory. This statement did not mean that everything a man did was solely to discover more of God's glory; instead, it meant that everything a man did should bring glory to God. Not only did Soli Deo Gloria change how men lived their lives, but it also changed how they viewed science. From this new perspective, science did not have to be studied solely to learn about God; instead, someone could study pure experimental science and glorify God with his work.

This shift in scientific philosophy completely changed the study of science, for men did not just study it for theological reasons. Instead, true scientists began performing pure scientific experiments. One of the Reformers who emphasized that science should be studied to praise God was Philip Melanchthon. According to science historian Robert Westman, Melanchthon "links the study of nature with praise of the Creator" in one of his astronomy speeches. In this speech, Melanchthon states, "To recognize God the Creator from the order of the heavenly motions and of His entire work, that is true and useful divination, for which reason God wanted us also to behold His works. Let us therefore cherish the subject which demonstrates the order of the motions . . . and let us not be deterred by harmful opinions, since there are some who . . . always hate the pursuit of knowledge."5 This enthusiasm Melanchthon had for praising God through scientific study eventually spread to more scientists over the next century. Crucially, Melanchthon trained the theologian Jacob Heerbrand, who eventually taught one of the most influential scientists of the seventeenth century.

Kepler and Sola Deo Gloria

The influential scientist trained by Jacob Heerbrand was Johannes Kepler. Kepler, one of the most respected and influential early scientists, had originally planned to become a Lutheran minister and studied under Heerbrand. However, God had other plans for Kepler, and he instead devoted his life to science. For Kepler, his scientific studies were as noble as theology because God could be glorified in both. Kepler clearly believed that since everything should be done for God's glory, pursuing pure science could bring honor to God. This is clearly seen in Kepler's Harmonies of the World. Near the book's conclusion, Kepler prays, "I give thanks to Thee, O Lord Creator. . . . To the men who are going to read those demonstrations, I have made manifest the glory of Thy works. . . . If I have loved my own glory . . . while I am advancing in the work destined for Thy glory, be gentle and merciful and pardon me; and finally deign graciously to effect that these demonstrations give way to Thy glory and the salvation of souls and nowhere be an obstacle to that."6

Kepler, greatly affected by the Reformation's Soli Deo Gloria, sought to understand the universe for God's glory and tremendously influenced the modern scientific era. Not only di Soli Deo Gloria influence Kepler to study science for God's glory, but as the Reformation spread across Europe, other scientists studied the universe in his name. As these scientists and many others glorified God in their work, they found that by seeking pure science, they could see more of God's work in the world. While their goal was not to pursue science merely to interpret Scripture, when they studied science, they unsurprisingly found the touch of God in everything. Without a doubt, the Reformation's Soli Deo Gloria inspired many of the early scientists to study the universe in order to glorify God through science.

Boyle and Sola Deo Gloria

Soli Deo Gloria also helped increase experimental science by teaching that God himself controlled nature for his glory. According to historian Eugene Klaaren in Religious Origins of Modern Science, Aristotelian philosophy emphasized that physical matter was eternal, God did not directly control it, and that matter morphed and changed over time. Since this philosophy taught that matter did not have definite properties, it discouraged experimental science from exploring how materials could relate to one another. The seventeenth-century Christian scientist Robert Boyle broke science away from this philosophy.

Boyle, strongly influenced by the Reformation and Soli Deo Gloria, argued for "the continual dependence of creation upon God." From this presupposition that nature depended on God, Boyle explained that matter was not "an eternal given, a kind of ever-receding intractable stuff from which things are made and . . . [from which things] receive a relative explanation [of their properties]."7 Instead, Boyle expressed that God created matter with specific qualities for his glory. Consequently, his studies showed that "created matter, now a full-fledged building block in the world, could be used for precise explanations. The conditions were met for characterizing matter universally with such mechanical affections as size, shape, and local motion."8 Rather than merely guessing what properties materials had, scientists could now discover both their precise elemental properties and how they interacted with other materials. This change in scientific understanding quickly revolutionized the study of chemistry. Therefore, Boyle's assertions, founded in Soli Deo Gloria, reshaped the field of experimental science.

The Solas Today

Although subtle, both Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria still strongly influence modern science. Since many early scientists believed in the truths of Scripture and that God can and should be honored in all things, they chose to study science in order to learn more about the world rather than merely using it to interpret Scripture. When these scientists began studying the world around them, they discovered the intricacy of God's handiwork and glorified him through their work. This early experimental science quickly spread, and the modern scientific revolution continued to grow thanks to the work of Kepler, Boyle, and many other scientists who saw the importance of Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria and chose to pursue truth and honor God in their studies of pure experimental science.

Without a doubt, the Reformation has had an extensive influence on the modern world. Almost every aspect of modern life has been shaped in some way by this revival of Christian principles, including science. The precedents set by these solas, and especially Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria, not only gave rise to the modern scientific movement but also shaped the lives of a multitude of its scientists. Although many contemporary historians attempt to show that the Reformers and their solas resisted the growth of science, it is beyond question that the Reformers did indeed help science grow. Rather than blaming the Reformers, these historians should instead be thanking them for their vital contribution to the scientific age. Without the influence of these Reformers, the scientific world would be very different and may not be as advanced as it currently is. Sadly, modern science has drifted far from the early scientists' desire to glorify God through their work. Still, the legacy of both the Reformers and the early scientists lives on. Regardless of whether modern scientists acknowledge the origin of their field of study, modern science will always be founded upon the precedents set by both Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria.

Amo

#2114
https://creation.com/fossils-in-a-day

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteFossils in a day?

Paleontologists (fossil experts) traditionally believe that time—lots of it—is an essential ingredient to form fossils. But a paper by three scientists in the online journal Palaeontology indicates they may well have created fossils in a single day.

A summary of their paper is titled: "Researchers have discovered how to make proper fossils—in a day". It says they "figured out a way—by compressing that incredibly lengthy process into a day."

Taphonomy is a field within paleontology that studies the chemical and physical processes of decay and fossilization. Such scientists have long recognized that heat and pressure are especially necessary ingredients for forming fossils. Of course, there is plenty of pressure on deep sediments, and in addition to the heating associated with this there are also many lava flows throughout the fossil record.

To experimentally mimic the fossilization process, taphonomists have undertaken what they call maturation experiments. These often involve placing an organic specimen (say a leaf or feather) in a small sealed capsule and then heating and pressurizing the contents. These experiments are meant to speed up the rate of chemical degradation and shorten the time for fossil formation.

In the Palaeontology paper, the researchers noted that traditional maturation experiments face challenges. One of the more significant of these is that labile molecules (relatively unstable substances that are readily changed or broken down) and volatile molecules (those which readily evaporate) should be lost during maturation, but are instead trapped inside the holding capsule. As a result, an organic specimen can become more of a soft, spongy 'mush' than anything like a fossil.

So these three scientists decided on what they called a 'novel' approach. They first buried the organic specimens within easily-compacted clay, and then applied pressure to make a 'tablet' of clay with the specimen inside. These tablets were then placed inside the capsules.

The purpose was to explore more closely what is stable and what is mobile—what is trapped in the compacted specimen, and what escapes into the sediment. They called this an "initial compaction in sediment, followed by maturation [temperature and pressure]."1

The outcomes were fascinating. According to the Science Alert article, the bird feathers, leaves, resin and other substances were "spectacularly well preserved". It quotes lead author Saitta as saying:

     We were absolutely thrilled. ... They looked like real fossils—there were      dark films of skin and scales, the bones became browned. Even by      eye, they looked right.2

The Palaeontology paper argues:

     In this procedure, porous sediment allows maturation breakdown      products to escape into the sediment and maturation chamber, while      recalcitrant, immobile components are contained, more closely      mimicking the natural conditions of fossilization.1

Simply put, "unstable molecules ... leak out into the sediment, instead of turning the entire fossil to mush."1

Their paper goes on to explore the utility of this approach and its implications in explaining the many exceptionally-preserved fossils in the rock record (their origin is a topic of great debate among experts).

Such aspects are certainly worthy of further exploration. But equally important is that the research undertaken highlights the importance of sediment in fossil formation.

Needed—rapid burial

First, the scientists confirm that sediment plays an important role in removing unstable and volatile molecules that would otherwise prevent fossilization.

Second, their results highlight a need to more thoroughly study the sediment—what are its origins, how abundant is the sediment, sediment movement and deposition—because rapidly deposited sediments are needed to induce the pressure needed.3

After many decades of measuring sediment loads and sedimentation rates around the globe (part of my own professional field of interest), we find that in all climatic environments they are remarkably low. Instantaneous deposits from flooding rivers are typically only millimetres or centimetres deep, not the metres or tens of metres needed to induce pressure to speed chemical degradation.

In short, current surface processes of erosion and deposition of sediments cannot explain the billions of fossils found globally. What was needed was a flood of unprecedented magnitude, capable of providing vast quantities of sediment over a short time period.4

These recent experimental results support the description of the global Flood of Noah in Genesis 6–8. This would have provided unprecedented rapid burial in deep sediment that was able to remove unstable and volatile molecules and cause the pressure needed for extensive organic fossil preservation—without millions of years.



4WD

#2115
Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 18:46:41I quote scripture and the words of Jesus Christ to you as examples of what my faith is in, and you reply with an insinuation that my faith is based upon EGW's SDA. Here we are, go back and repost all the quotes from EGW and or SDA's I have used on this thread as argument of proof of my positions. Good luck with that. If your intention is to falsely imply that my views and or arguments against your deep time evolutionary faith, originated and are held by SDA's alone, your error is blatantly obvious to any who will even give a cursory examination of the issues.
What I believe to be the cosmological history of the universe, really has little influence on my faith in God, in Jesus Christ, or the Gospel. I believe in the truth of the Genesis account of creation just as much as you.  I just do not believe your interpretation of the Genesis account is the correct one. It does not agree with God's general revelation.  God says that the heavens declare the glory of God and the skies proclaim His handiwork.  You reject that out of hand.

You take offense at my referring to your faith as EGW's SDA faith. Yet you refer to my faith as deep time evolutionary faith.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 18:46:41Your testimony and accusations cannot change the fact that your deep time evolutionary faith is wholly extra biblical. This is not my, EGW's, SDA's, or anyone else's fault. It is simply your choice. 
My faith in God is not deep time evolutionary faith any more than it is heliocentric faith, or gravity faith, or electromagnetic faith, or relativity faith.  And yes, what I believe to be true about the cosmological history of the universe is extra biblical, because I don't believe the bible has anything literal at all to say about that history.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 18, 2024 - 18:46:41Maybe you will fond the following article of interest.

https://answersingenesis.org/church/how-reformers-beliefs-affected-early-modern-science/
I find very little of interest in anything from answersingenesis. I think most of the garbage coming out of such sites has driven more people away from a faith in God than it could ever possibly bring to a faith in God.  If you need such stuff to reinforce your belief in God and in His word, then you are indeed most pathetic and weak of faith.

Amo

QuoteWhat I believe to be the cosmological history of the universe, really has little influence on my faith in God, in Jesus Christ, or the Gospel. I believe in the truth of the Genesis account of creation just as much as you.  I just do not believe your interpretation of the Genesis account is the correct one. It does not agree with God's general revelation.  God says that the heavens declare the glory of God and the skies proclaim His handiwork.  You reject that out of hand.

I do not reject the glory revealed by God's creation in any way shape or form. I simply acknowledge scripture as a whole as the truth. If you who deny the creation account as the scriptures simply and plainly state it, can still believe God's creation brings glory and honor to His name, YEC's most certainly can and do the same. They do it even more so, believing that He is not limited by time and space as we are, we reckon the biblical account of creation in six days to be true, making the event more miraculous than deep time scenarios.

Your faith however is not in the testimony of the author you quote regarding his actual views of creation, save in this one thing, that God's creation reveals His glory. You are the one who rejects the complete testimony of David, not YEC's. Observe the rest of the testimony you pulled your idea out of, without quoting the scripture I might add.

Psa 19:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. 2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. 3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. 4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof. 7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. 10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. 11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. 12 Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. 13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. 14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.

David declares that the law of the Lord is perfect, His testimony sure, His statutes are right, and commandments are pure. This would include of course God's fourth commandment concerning God's sabbath day. The testimony of which you deny concerning both the fact that it should kept and observed, and that the world was created in six days.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

David also said -

Psa 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. 6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

While you may quote David and claim to agree with this or that particular verse of his testimony, you are not of the same faith of his testimony concerning creation. Or the testimony of God's own words written with His own finger, and spoken by His own mouth to all of Israel. Yet you declare that I am the one who rejects David's testimony regarding God's creation, "out of hand". Go figure.

QuoteYou take offense at my referring to your faith as EGW's SDA faith. Yet you refer to my faith as deep time evolutionary faith.

You believe in deep time, and evolution, do you not? You did not get these beliefs or shall we say faith, from the scriptures. You got it from deep time evolutionary believers and preachers, did you not? You agree with their testimony, do you not? If not, then where did your faith in these teachings originate?

I am not offended by the fact that you suggest I believe as EGW and SDA's do, this is true. The origin of our faith though, is the holy scriptures. Which certainly did not originate with EGW or SDA's at all. The vast majority of what EGW or SDA's believe concerning scripture, was believed by a great many bible believers long before us as well. My faith therefore cannot be in or established by EGW or SDA's. We have simply continued a faith that existed before us.

QuoteMy faith in God is not deep time evolutionary faith any more than it is heliocentric faith, or gravity faith, or electromagnetic faith, or relativity faith.  And yes, what I believe to be true about the cosmological history of the universe is extra biblical, because I don't believe the bible has anything literal at all to say about that history.

So what do you think of a God who commanded people to observe a sabbath day commemorating an event that never actually happened as that command states, and even punished them when they would not observe a day commemorating creation in six days, which never even really happened? Even declaring the death penalty upon those who would not keep it. Do you worship such a God? Or are the scriptural testimonies regarding these events not true as well? Herein lies the real problem with denying scriptural testimony in favor of the testimony of others. The end of such produces perceptions of God which malign His character, and cast doubt upon his word.

There is a difference between one's faith in that which can be observed, experienced, and tested relative to our own existence, and that which is far behind our existence concerning the origins of all that is. Even if you do not think so. Scientific observations about what exists and functions within, outside, and around us at present, are not built upon speculations and or faith. They are realities along side of, and or within which we exist. Though they may be misunderstood, greater clarification will develop over time concerning such. This is a far cry from the extrapolating speculations of deep time theories, which are necessarily built more upon faith than so called "scientific" facts. Without question, such speculations are subject to great margins of error, if the base premise of what they are built upon are wrong or even off a little from the get go.

This is the exact problem the scriptures themselves address among those who will deny the reality, authenticity, or accuracy of the historical testimony of the holy scriptures. As a great many of the deep time evolutionary faith do. Including yourself, as I have gathered from your own testimony.

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: 2  That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 4 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

It is not possible for those who do not know or will not acknowledge crucial facts or histories of creation and our existence, to extrapolate truth or fact based theories built upon faulty premise, and or certainly extremely limited data and information. If the creation account of holy scripture is accurate as plainly stated, then deep time evolutionary scientists are building upon faulty assumptions from the get go. This is the point at which the faith of deep timers and YEC's heads in two totally different directions. That of the latter being based upon scripture, and that of the former based upon human speculation and conjecture found nowhere in scripture at all. Which according to scripture, is extremely data deficient, and built upon faulty premise.

QuoteI find very little of interest in anything from answersingenesis. I think most of the garbage coming out of such sites has driven more people away from a faith in God than it could ever possibly bring to a faith in God.  If you need such stuff to reinforce your belief in God and in His word, then you are indeed most pathetic and weak of faith.

Ah yes. YEC's are of course ignorant, pathetic, and weak in faith if they believe scientific observation, testing, and extrapolation can support the biblical account of creation as simply stated. While I suppose deep timers are particularly intelligent, wise, and strong in faith because they believe the speculations of many who either do not consider scriptural testimony at all, or deny those scriptures which do simply state the time scale and or methodology of creation. Basing their faith upon observations concerning what they are aware of, can observe at present, and more than just a little presumption about past ions which they neither can or have observed. At least you are convinced in your own mind.

Hos 13:1 When Ephraim spake trembling, he exalted himself in Israel; but when he offended in Baal, he died. 2 And now they sin more and more, and have made them molten images of their silver, and idols according to their own understanding, all of it the work of the craftsmen: they say of them, Let the men that sacrifice kiss the calves.

Deep time evolutionary faith is an idol, the work (writings and teachings) of the craftsman who developed the speculations and theories it is built upon. Many assumptions made by those who crafted this idol, have turned out to be very wrong. Others twisted and manipulated facts or observations at times, to bolster views that were not really supported by facts. Still others committed straight up fraud to support their created and or chosen faith or narratives. Many also turn to this faith, with the exact intent of denying the existence of God and or our Lord Jesus Christ. The theory also lent credence to certain racist views of the past, and fueled the fires of more than one tyrannical leader of the past as well. By their fruits we shall know them.

Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sun May 19, 2024 - 14:58:41I am not offended by the fact that you suggest I believe as EGW and SDA's do, this is true.
What can I say?  I guess your faith in EGW pretty much allows you to believe whatever you want, whether real or not, whether true or false, whether right or wrong and malign any who do hold an EGW faith.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Mon May 20, 2024 - 08:55:18What can I say?  I guess your faith in EGW pretty much allows you to believe whatever you want, whether real or not, whether true or false, whether right or wrong and malign any who do hold an EGW faith.

Obviously, you can say whatever you want, and either deny or ignore a great deal of holy scripture which has been presented to you. Which you falsely declare is placing faith in EGW, as though she were the originator of these scriptures, and or the faith of millions who believed as she does long before her. Which is not to mention a great deal of written materials from some of those millions testifying of their faith in that which she chose to believe as well. While pointing out once again, that her writings have not been referred to even once that I can recall, on these boards as proof and or support for anything being discussed. But hey, what do facts right in front of peoples faces mean in today's world? A world ripe for deception.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Fri May 24, 2024 - 08:08:04Obviously, you can say whatever you want, and either deny or ignore a great deal of holy scripture which has been presented to you.
I neither deny nor ignore any holy Scripture.  What I do is deny and/or ignore your interpretation of some of those Scriptures. 

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Fri May 24, 2024 - 08:08:04But hey, what do facts right in front of peoples faces mean in today's world? A world ripe for deception.
What a perfect description of the YEC portrayal of the cosmological history of the universe.  And it fits you to a tee.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Fri May 24, 2024 - 08:26:23I neither deny nor ignore any holy Scripture.  What I do is deny and/or ignore your interpretation of some of those Scriptures.

Yes, as in all scripture that plainly states that which you have chosen not to believe.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Fri May 24, 2024 - 08:32:06What a perfect description of the YEC portrayal of the cosmological history of the universe.  And it fits you to a tee.

YEC's do not claim to know cosmological history. Apart from that which they believe to be revealed from scripture, by faith. Deep timer "scientists so called" have believed they do, though their world is being rocked of late.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZUe1wdvq8k

Their theories and presumptions about deep time evolution of the universe and the big bang, are just that. They do not know. For someone who trashes what the Catholic Church once believed about cosmology, you sure have become a follower of the Roman Catholic deep time big bang theory. Emphasis in the following quotes under link below which they were taken from, is mine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaître

Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (/ləˈmɛtrə/ lə-MET-rə; French: 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, theoretical physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe, which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble. He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU, and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom", and later calling it "the beginning of the world".

https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/the-jesuit-astronomer-who-conceived-of-the-big-bang

The Jesuit Astronomer Who Conceived of the Big Bang

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Fri May 24, 2024 - 21:52:33YEC's do not claim to know cosmological history.
Of course they do.  They, you, claim that their own particular translation/interpretation of the first couple of chapters in Genesis completely establishes cosmological history.  And that from a problematic rendering of the Hebrew word "yom", together with a failure to distinguish between concepts of creating something from nothing and making or forming something from existing materials.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Fri May 24, 2024 - 21:23:43Yes, as in all scripture that plainly states that which you have chosen not to believe.
But of course, what you claim to be plainly stated is plainly stated only in your warped sense of truth.  And I have not simply chosen to disagree with you, there are literally tons and tons of information and data to prove that you are wrong.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Fri May 24, 2024 - 21:52:33https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZUe1wdvq8k

Their theories and presumptions about deep time evolution of the universe and the big bang, are just that. They do not know. For someone who trashes what the Catholic Church once believed about cosmology, you sure have become a follower of the Roman Catholic deep time big bang theory. Emphasis in the following quotes under link below which they were taken from, is mine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaître

Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (/ləˈmɛtrə/ lə-MET-rə; French: 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, theoretical physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe, which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble. He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU, and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom", and later calling it "the beginning of the world".

https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/the-jesuit-astronomer-who-conceived-of-the-big-bang

The Jesuit Astronomer Who Conceived of the Big Bang
Because Lemaitre was a Roman Catholic and you obviously hate anything Catholic, then he must have been wrong about everything else. What an absolutely abysmal way of thinking.

4WD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre#Honours


Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (/ləˈmɛtrə/ lə-MET-rə; French: [ʒɔʁʒ ləmɛːtʁ] ⓘ; 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, theoretical physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain.[1] He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe,[2] which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble.[3][4] He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU,[5][6] and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[7][8][3][4] Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom",[9] and later calling it "the beginning of the world".[10]

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 05:00:50Of course they do.  They, you, claim that their own particular translation/interpretation of the first couple of chapters in Genesis completely establishes cosmological history.  And that from a problematic rendering of the Hebrew word "yom", together with a failure to distinguish between concepts of creating something from nothing and making or forming something from existing materials.

Genesis establishes what God did, certainly not scientific explanation of how He did it. Which is no doubt far beyond us. Yet specifically addressing the time frame involved, as demonstrated I do believe, by every translation of scripture to date. As I have asked you to provide a different one if one exists many times over. Which you have not. Apparently, all translators to date, do not consider their rendering of the Hebrew word yom, problematic. Which those of the chosen deep time evolutionary faith would, and do.

Personally, I am not sure if the Genesis account includes the creation of the entire universe, or is more specifically about our own galaxy and planet of course. Other galaxies might involve other creation events altogether. Which would explain the existing problems concerning the apparent different rates of expansion which the James Webb has now confirmed. My speculations of course, are just that. As are those of deep time evolutionists and big bangers also. Who have and do continue to prove themselves wrong, many times over.




Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 05:11:06Because Lemaitre was a Roman Catholic and you obviously hate anything Catholic, then he must have been wrong about everything else. What an absolutely abysmal way of thinking.

You do not have a clue, about how I or anyone else thinks. My point was pretty obvious. I think Roman Catholics and evolutionists have this much in common, they have both been, and are both wrong about a great many things. Their agreement upon deep time evolutionary processes as the mechanism of our existence, is proof of nothing.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 05:18:04https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre#Honours


Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (/ləˈmɛtrə/ lə-MET-rə; French: [ʒɔʁʒ ləmɛːtʁ] ⓘ; 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, theoretical physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain.[1] He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe,[2] which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble.[3][4] He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU,[5][6] and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[7][8][3][4] Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom",[9] and later calling it "the beginning of the world".[10]

Which is now being questioned concerning new observations by the James Webb telescope. Confirming the problem, of different rates of expansion in different places.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 05:50:44Which is now being questioned concerning new observations by the James Webb telescope. Confirming the problem, of different rates of expansion in different places.
But not questioning the fact of expansion. The question involves rates.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 05:47:16You do not have a clue, about how I or anyone else thinks.
You have demonstrated how you think over and over again. You think you can speak intelligently about things you actually know nothing about.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 06:19:54But not questioning the fact of expansion. The question involves rates.

Yes, different rates of expansion causes issues regarding one big bang. Of course at this point, concerning one theory and or presumption built upon another, the links become increasingly weak, or certainly subject to change regarding new information. It is all best guess work concerning that which no one observed, with many known variables, and no idea of how many more variables still await discovery.

1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 06:23:33You have demonstrated how you think over and over again. You think you can speak intelligently about things you actually know nothing about.

Devolving back to insults I see. Sure 4WD, I am not intelligent enough to read the existing translations of the bible and see that none of them translate or interpret the word yom as evolutionists would like. I am not intelligent enough to read and post article, after article, after article, concerning what "scientists" have concluded themselves, they have been wrong about. Deducing thereby, the unreliability of their ever morphing speculative landscape. I am not intelligent enough to see deep time evolution revealed from within scripture, even after reading the bible in its entirety many times over, as apparently you are not either. As I have asked you to relate such from scripture many times over, to no avail. What is the source of your supposed wisdom, if not holy scripture? Is it not the wisdom of this world, which the Lord laughs at to scorn?

Pro 19:3 The foolishness of man perverteth his way: and his heart fretteth against the LORD.

Exo 20:1 And God spake all these words, saying,........
Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.


Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 06:39:24Yes, different rates of expansion causes issues regarding one big bang. Of course at this point, concerning one theory and or presumption built upon another, the links become increasingly weak, or certainly subject to change regarding new information. It is all best guess work concerning that which no one observed, with many known variables, and no idea of how many more variables still await discovery.

1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
When you post quotes like 1 Corinthians 3:11:20 in any conversation about the origin of the universe, you demonstrate not only being scientifically challenged, you also demonstrate being theologically and biblically challenged.

The foundation of the church, not the universe, is the point being addressed.  It is that foundation, independent of the actual cosmological history of the universe, that is being addressed.  That is not changed no matter how God chose to establish the universe.

The knowledge about the beginnings of the universe are simply not in view here.

+-Recent Topics

In the middle of our heat wave...... by Rella
Today at 15:01:27

Creation scientists by Amo
Today at 12:45:03

IMMIGRATION INFO by Amo
Today at 12:36:02

A GLORIFIED BODY BEYOND THE SUNSET by 4WD
Today at 04:49:46

New Discovery explains why Climate Models don't work by 4WD
Today at 03:52:09

Hell's Daily Tally by NyawehNyoh
Yesterday at 18:42:56

mommydi by Alan
Yesterday at 12:34:55

Question from a Roman Catholic by DaveW
Yesterday at 07:05:52

How does one get "INTO CHRIST"?~ D. W. Baker by Red Baker
Yesterday at 05:11:38

Roman politics by Amo
Sun Jun 16, 2024 - 13:03:05

Powered by EzPortal