Discussion Regarding Evolution, Fact or Fiction?

[The Barbarian]

The assertion that "science is spawned by Satan" is just as stupid as the moronic statement that "evolution is a fact."

It's directly observed.   Can't do better than that.

[Amo]

What evidence do you have of creation?

Strange, I thought you believed God created the world, just according to the theories of "scientists" not the plain testimony given in Exodus. Is this wrong? Do you deny creation altogether? Just exactly what are you arguing against, how God created, or if God created? Are you an atheist dabbling with God, or are you a "Christian" dabbling with atheist backed evolution? Did God create this world, and if so, why do you argue that there is no evidence for such? Isn't all the evidence you consider real, in relation to how you think God created this world?

[Amo]

You should be a politician. You gave a response that didn't actually address a single thing I said.

I answered the exact point and issue of your observation. You implied that there would not be such debate about this issue if the truth was so plain to see, I pointed out that Lucifer and many of the angels rejected the truth of God and the authority of His word while in the literal presence of His power and glory. One of the most prominent features of sin, is its astonishing denial of the truth right in front of its face. The scriptures themselves reveal and testify of this denial in fallen humanity over and over again, and demonstrate that it does not matter how conclusive anything is in this world of sin, it can and will be denied by the sinful heart unto willful delusion. 

The obvious presumption attached to your friends observations regarding snowfall, is that each layer represents a year. According to scripture, it never even rained let alone snowed before the flood. The four seasons now common, did not exist before the flood. At creation humanity like the rest of life on this planet, did not wear clothes, an obvious indication of the mildness of pre-flood weather. As always your friend makes the same presumption most if not all "scientists" who deny creation do, which the bible warns against. The presumption that the world is much like it has always been for countless ages now, and all things continue as they always have with little to no change saving over deep deep time. This of course because they deny the truth of scripture regarding creation and the flood. Same old, same old, same old, same old. This issue is about faith built upon certain presumptions and where one will places it, and that is all!

[Amo]

It's directly observed.   Can't do better than that.

Even if the statement were true, which it is not, it would amount to nothing in the way of denying YE creation. It would simply mean God created life with the ability to evolve, not that He created the world through the evolutionary process of deep time in contradiction to what He Himself has told us and written for us with His own hand. God is not subject to any theory of fallen humanity in any way shape or form concerning anything. You are in the box of His creation, He will never be in any box created by the observations of the fallen. To the contrary, any and all who try to confine Him to a box of their own understanding or creation are in danger of denying the testimony given by His chosen against the same.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

2 Tim 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

[4WD]

He will never be in any box created by the observations of the fallen. To the contrary, any and all who try to confine Him to a box of their own understanding or creation are in danger of denying the testimony given by His chosen against the same.

Amo,
The terribly sad reality of that statement is that you don't even realize that describes you to a tee.

[Amo]

Amo,
The terribly sad reality of that statement is that you don't even realize that describes you to a tee.

Yes, sad little man that I am. Please do expound.

[soterion]

I answered the exact point and issue of your observation. You implied that there would not be such debate about this issue if the truth was so plain to see, I pointed out that Lucifer and many of the angels rejected the truth of God and the authority of His word while in the literal presence of His power and glory. One of the most prominent features of sin, is its astonishing denial of the truth right in front of its face. The scriptures themselves reveal and testify of this denial in fallen humanity over and over again, and demonstrate that it does not matter how conclusive anything is in this world of sin, it can and will be denied by the sinful heart unto willful delusion. 

The obvious presumption attached to your friends observations regarding snowfall, is that each layer represents a year. According to scripture, it never even rained let alone snowed before the flood. The four seasons now common, did not exist before the flood. At creation humanity like the rest of life on this planet, did not wear clothes, an obvious indication of the mildness of pre-flood weather. As always your friend makes the same presumption most if not all "scientists" who deny creation do, which the bible warns against. The presumption that the world is much like it has always been for countless ages now, and all things continue as they always have with little to no change saving over deep deep time. This of course because they deny the truth of scripture regarding creation and the flood. Same old, same old, same old, same old. This issue is about faith built upon certain presumptions and where one will places it, and that is all!

Here is a repost of part of what I had earlier shared with you:

I recall a geologist, telling of how he gained some degree, went to Antarctica and took part in a coring. He said they counted over 300,000 layers (whatevers), which indicated 300,000 winter and summer seasons- 300,000 years.

I don't believe there is any contradiction between a proper interpretation of the word of God and a proper interpretation of the physical evidence. But then, arriving at the proper interpretation, either way, is the problem. I don't know any other way to interpret 300,000 layers of seasons, than to say that there have been at least 300,000 years of seasons to result in those layers.

Here is why what you said doesn't make sense to me. The layers in the core are all uniform for the entire 300,000 years. If you are arguing for a ~6,000 year old earth, then that could not be the case. To fit your view of the earth, the top-most portion of the core would have the layers that indicate post-flood conditions, and then a different pattern below that which represents pre-flood conditions. Also, there wouldn't be 300,000 of anything to interpret as 300,000 years.

Now, I don't know exactly how all of that would look in a core sample, but I seriously doubt a 6,000 year old earth would result in 300,000 years of layers in a core that lead up to the relative present time.

That is why I said this:

Now I don't know if you hold to a ~6,000 year old earth, but many scientist would disagree with that idea, because of things like that core. Unless we want to say that God created false evidence of age into the earth that doesn't match up to the reality of its youth, then I would suggest that this issue is beyond our complete understanding.

In all fairness, I did forget to share something about that geologist with you. He is a creationist and he believes in the flood and everything else in the Bible. Also, he is not a uniformitarianist. Knowing that, I am sure that he had the understanding to take the flood and everything else the Bible says into account when looking at that core and striving to make sense of it.

I am not a scientist, so it is not up to me to make an accurate conclusion of all of this. I don't personally have a stake in how old or young the earth is. Does God require us to get that info exactly right? I doubt it. I would think acknowledging Him as the Creator of it all is enough.

[4WD]

Yes, sad little man that I am. Please do expound.

You repeatedly note that you and everyone else constitute the fallen. And if there is any box being built up around God and His creation process, it is certainly the YEC.  A smaller and more confining box than that of the YEC would be hard to imagine.

[Amo]

Here is a repost of part of what I had earlier shared with you:

Here is why what you said doesn't make sense to me. The layers in the core are all uniform for the entire 300,000 years. If you are arguing for a ~6,000 year old earth, then that could not be the case. To fit your view of the earth, the top-most portion of the core would have the layers that indicate post-flood conditions, and then a different pattern below that which represents pre-flood conditions. Also, there wouldn't be 300,000 of anything to interpret as 300,000 years.

Now, I don't know exactly how all of that would look in a core sample, but I seriously doubt a 6,000 year old earth would result in 300,000 years of layers in a core that lead up to the relative present time.

That is why I said this:

In all fairness, I did forget to share something about that geologist with you. He is a creationist and he believes in the flood and everything else in the Bible. Also, he is not a uniformitarianist. Knowing that, I am sure that he had the understanding to take the flood and everything else the Bible says into account when looking at that core and striving to make sense of it.

I am not a scientist, so it is not up to me to make an accurate conclusion of all of this. I don't personally have a stake in how old or young the earth is. Does God require us to get that info exactly right? I doubt it. I would think acknowledging Him as the Creator of it all is enough.

Assuming the creation and flood accounts are literal and true, we have no idea what happened with wether cycles just developing during the transition from the world as created, to the world transformed by the flood. We know from scripture that everything changed radically during and after the flood. It is only under the presumptuous influence that all things have remained the same for long ages which contradicts scriptural testimony, that the number of layers are presumed to indicate years as well. There may very well have been very rapid and intense snow falls and layering for many years at and after the flood. The earths weather patterns were in upheaval undergoing rapid and radical change. Again, apart from the testimony of God's word, all is but guess work built upon this or that presumption concerning things we just do not know.

[Amo]

You repeatedly note that you and everyone else constitute the fallen. And if there is any box being built up around God and His creation process, it is certainly the YEC.  A smaller and more confining box than that of the YEC would be hard to imagine.

Only to those who consider God's word a restricting burden, rather than the liberating truth.

[4WD]

Only to those who consider God's word a restricting burden, rather than the liberating truth.

And again, Amo, you are the one who is placing your restricting burden on God's word.  You have taken the Hebrew word "yom" which can carry all manner of meanings depending upon the context and have declared that your interpretation is the only restricted meaning that can be applied.   

The Liberating truth is to let God decide that.  When He says that the heavens declare His handiwork, you say to Him, "No it does no such thing".  You say to Him, "That is science and science is wrong".

[Amo]

And again, Amo, you are the one who is placing your restricting burden on God's word.  You have taken the Hebrew word "yom" which can carry all manner of meanings depending upon the context and have declared that your interpretation is the only restricted meaning that can be applied.   

The Liberating truth is to let God decide that.  When He says that the heavens declare His handiwork, you say to Him, "No it does no such thing".  You say to Him, "That is science and science is wrong".

And again 4WD, Baloney!  God clearly pointed out what He meant in the creation account when reaffirming the same in giving of the fourth commandment to His own who acknowledge the truth of His words above their own thoughts and understanding. Your turn.

[soterion]

Assuming the creation and flood accounts are literal and true, we have no idea what happened with wether cycles just developing during the transition from the world as created, to the world transformed by the flood. We know from scripture that everything changed radically during and after the flood. It is only under the presumptuous influence that all things have remained the same for long ages which contradicts scriptural testimony, that the number of layers are presumed to indicate years as well. There may very well have been very rapid and intense snow falls and layering for many years at and after the flood. The earths weather patterns were in upheaval undergoing rapid and radical change. Again, apart from the testimony of God's word, all is but guess work built upon this or that presumption concerning things we just do not know.

Well, the guy I'm talking about is a Christian, believes the whole Bible, and is an expert in geology. You want to come here and say that your interpretation of the Bible trumps his understanding of what it says and trumps his expertise in geology.

Don't you think that a geologist, who is also a Bible believing Christian, could and would have taken into account the variables you describe here? If he says the layers represent years, it is probably because core sampling all over the world reveals years the same way. It's not like they had to wing it on that particular occasion in Antarctica to understand how to read a core sample. If, on that occasion, the sample looked different in some way, that would have been taken into account.

If I had to pick who to listen to regarding this info, you or him, he is the easy choice. But then, I may have missed something about you that could make the difference. Are you an expert in geology, meteorology, or other related field that you can tell that guy he is wrong?

[Alan]

Well, the guy I'm talking about is a Christian, believes the whole Bible, and is an expert in geology. You want to come here and say that your interpretation of the Bible trumps his understanding of what it says and trumps his expertise in geology.

Don't you think that a geologist, who is also a Bible believing Christian, could and would have taken into account the variables you describe here? If he says the layers represent years, it is probably because core sampling all over the world reveals years the same way. It's not like they had to wing it on that particular occasion in Antarctica to understand how to read a core sample. If, on that occasion, the sample looked different in some way, that would have been taken into account.

If I had to pick who to listen to regarding this info, you or him, he is the easy choice. But then, I may have missed something about you that could make the difference. Are you an expert in geology, meteorology, or other related field that you can tell that guy he is wrong?

Add to this the intensive study of climate change on this planet. Various sections of cores contain higher and lower concentrations of oxygen indicating extreme cold trends. The length of a given section and it's proximity in the core reveals when the climate change occurred and how long it lasted.


Cores have been dated to 800,000 years, within those samples many eras of climate change have been identified.

[Amo]

Well, the guy I'm talking about is a Christian, believes the whole Bible, and is an expert in geology. You want to come here and say that your interpretation of the Bible trumps his understanding of what it says and trumps his expertise in geology.

Don't you think that a geologist, who is also a Bible believing Christian, could and would have taken into account the variables you describe here? If he says the layers represent years, it is probably because core sampling all over the world reveals years the same way. It's not like they had to wing it on that particular occasion in Antarctica to understand how to read a core sample. If, on that occasion, the sample looked different in some way, that would have been taken into account.

If I had to pick who to listen to regarding this info, you or him, he is the easy choice. But then, I may have missed something about you that could make the difference. Are you an expert in geology, meteorology, or other related field that you can tell that guy he is wrong?

Experts disagree and are wrong all over the place. This "expert" thinks this, that "expert" thinks that. An expert guess or theory about what cannot be observed is still just a guess or a theory. I believe the bible, agree with some ideas concerning things not addressed in scripture, and have some of my own ideas concerning the same. I would not however state any of them as fact short of observable evidence, or accepting God's word as truth, as I do. God gave us all brains to use for ourselves, simply submitting your understanding to everyone or anyone claiming to be, or claimed to be an expert, is not making good use of your brain as I see and understand it.

[Amo]

Add to this the intensive study of climate change on this planet. Various sections of cores contain higher and lower concentrations of oxygen indicating extreme cold trends. The length of a given section and it's proximity in the core reveals when the climate change occurred and how long it lasted.


Cores have been dated to 800,000 years, within those samples many eras of climate change have been identified.

Only if certain presumed consistancies allowing for measurement are implemented. The violent and radical changes of a global flood the effects of which are unobservable and therefore unknowable make virtually impossible. This is not to mention the same presumptions regarding the unobservable past even if there have been long ages. Even apart from the flood of the bible, science itself reveals radical change in and of this world by observable plant and animal fossils, and geological formations and structuring.   

[soterion]

Amo,

Are you an expert in geology, meteorology, or other related field that you can tell that guy he is wrong?

Are you an expert in any such field that you can discount any and everybody who are experts in their fields and, as Christians, who also believe the earth is very old? Just your interpretation of the Bible is not enough to tell other Christians who know their stuff regarding the earth and weather that they are wrong.

[4WD]

Only if certain presumed consistancies allowing for measurement are implemented.

A statement supercharged in ignorance of reality.

[soterion]

Only if certain presumed consistancies allowing for measurement are implemented. The violent and radical changes of a global flood the effects of which are unobservable and therefore unknowable make virtually impossible. This is not to mention the same presumptions regarding the unobservable past even if there have been long ages. Even apart from the flood of the bible, science itself reveals radical change in and of this world by observable plant and animal fossils, and geological formations and structuring.

Are you an expert enough about how all of this works that you can demonstrate how to take seeming evidence of 300,000 years of time, or especially 800,000 years, and show how it can fit in a 6,000 year old earth? Christians who are also scientist know how to take such variables into consideration and they still arrive at these long time periods, but you still want to insult them all and claim that your viewpoint is correct and they are all wrong.

I want to know what your expertise is regarding all of this that your opinion is authoritative.

[soterion]

God gave us all brains to use for ourselves, simply submitting your understanding to everyone or anyone claiming to be, or claimed to be an expert, is not making good use of your brain as I see and understand it.

No one of us has expertise in every field of science out there, and many are experts of none, but we depend so much on those sciences. If not, then you can reject all medicines and most medical practices, all modes of transportation, all entertainment and communication devices, etc.

Your quote above lacks practical application. We all have to trust somebody. You trust that you can communicate with others via the internet and on these forums. Reading core samples is an older science than the internet. I expect that coring is about as common as appendectomies are to doctors. Such readings not only yield info about the age of the earth, but can also be used to find fossil fuels and other resources, as well as revealing changes in climate and surface terrain in geological history.

I would think Christian scientist who are geologist know how to read a core sample, a common practice as common as appendectomies, and know how to read changes in patterns that reveal changes in surface and subsurface conditions. If they say 300,000 years of uninterrupted core sample, or even 800,000 years, then I have zero reason to doubt them.

If the only scientist you can trust are those who agree with your interpretation of the Bible, then that's fine. But, how do you know you can trust them any more than you can trust those who say the earth is old?

[Amo]

Amo,

Are you an expert in geology, meteorology, or other related field that you can tell that guy he is wrong?

Are you an expert in any such field that you can discount any and everybody who are experts in their fields and, as Christians, who also believe the earth is very old? Just your interpretation of the Bible is not enough to tell other Christians who know their stuff regarding the earth and weather that they are wrong.

Same old junk. Is God's word true, or are supposed "experts" in this or that field which contradict the testimony of God's word true? Who has chosen these "experts" you speak of as "experts", as "experts"? Is it not the wisdom of this world that has chosen and acknowledges many of these supposed "experts" as such? What, are you some kind of self proclaimed "expert" concerning who actually is an "expert" whom all should submit to? Does someone studying this or that under the direct influence of another and accepting the presumptions their theories are built upon, equal an "expert" who cannot be refuted? Go to, bow to your chosen experts, I will bow to the word of God as the most reliable expert testimony in this world.

1 for 3:18 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.

The world is filled with "experts", but the wisdom of this world is altogether vain. Submit to the word of God, test and prove all things accordingly, lest you fall prey to the supposed wisdom which is foolishness to God.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

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.

There are experts of light, and there are experts of darkness. The former submits to the testimony of God, the latter to other testimony.

[Amo]

A statement supercharged in ignorance of reality.

A statement supercharged in the ignorance of those who chose the wisdom of this world above the wisdom of the testimony of God.

[Amo]

Are you an expert enough about how all of this works that you can demonstrate how to take seeming evidence of 300,000 years of time, or especially 800,000 years, and show how it can fit in a 6,000 year old earth? Christians who are also scientist know how to take such variables into consideration and they still arrive at these long time periods, but you still want to insult them all and claim that your viewpoint is correct and they are all wrong.

I want to know what your expertise is regarding all of this that your opinion is authoritative.

No one has to be an expert to examine and critique the testimony of supposed "experts" for themselves. I am sorry you lack this motivation, and consider yourself to inferior to examine and judge the speculations of others claiming to be or claimed to be "experts" for yourself. I don't choose any experts to follow, save the expert testimony of the word of God which is not built upon the speculations of fallen humanity, but the direct inspiration of God. This is who and what I consider expert, not those schooled in the wisdom of this earth. We simply do not agree on who exactly is an expert, and apparently never will.

[Amo]

No one of us has expertise in every field of science out there, and many are experts of none, but we depend so much on those sciences. If not, then you can reject all medicines and most medical practices, all modes of transportation, all entertainment and communication devices, etc.

Your quote above lacks practical application. We all have to trust somebody. You trust that you can communicate with others via the internet and on these forums. Reading core samples is an older science than the internet. I expect that coring is about as common as appendectomies are to doctors. Such readings not only yield info about the age of the earth, but can also be used to find fossil fuels and other resources, as well as revealing changes in climate and surface terrain in geological history.

I would think Christian scientist who are geologist know how to read a core sample, a common practice as common as appendectomies, and know how to read changes in patterns that reveal changes in surface and subsurface conditions. If they say 300,000 years of uninterrupted core sample, or even 800,000 years, then I have zero reason to doubt them.

If the only scientist you can trust are those who agree with your interpretation of the Bible, then that's fine. But, how do you know you can trust them any more than you can trust those who say the earth is old?

Total hogwash. None of the scientific advancements you state above are or ever were dependent upon the theory of evolution or deep time. These two are simply branches of scientific speculation and theory, not at all the base of science which all else is built upon. The science of all the advancements you mentioned are observable, testable, and applicable unto fact or fiction. Many mistakes have been made concerning them, which even resulted in death, but are able to be corrected because we can test, observe, and correct mistakes in relation to them. These sciences have nothing to do with, and are in no way dependent upon the speculative scientific theorizing of evolution and deep time. Neither of which can be tested and or observed apart from certain presumptions concerning unobservable conditions and or constants which themselves cannot be known or verified.

[Alan]

Same old junk. Is God's word true, or are supposed "experts" in this or that field which contradict the testimony of God's word true? Who has chosen these "experts" you speak of as "experts", as "experts"?

Stop right there. How do you explain the findings of many experts that have never heard or seen the testimony of God's word?  From my experience it is only YEC "experts" that bend the facts to suit there bias. The majority of researchers out there have no axe to grind with God and many do not even think about it, they're just working in their given field and recording the results, but when you see those results you claim it to be a lie, which makes no sense whatsoever.

[Amo]

Stop right there. How do you explain the findings of many experts that have never heard or seen the testimony of God's word?  From my experience it is only YEC "experts" that bend the facts to suit there bias. The majority of researchers out there have no axe to grind with God and many do not even think about it, they're just working in their given field and recording the results, but when you see those results you claim it to be a lie, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Moot point. Regardless of what they have heard or not, presumptions must be made by anyone trying to explain that which was unobserved, and is unobservable. Identifying what the world is composed of and the order of that composition, cannot ever of itself concretely explain how it came to be. For now such remains in the realm of theory or faith.

[Alan]

Moot point. Regardless of what they have heard or not, presumptions must be made by anyone trying to explain that which was unobserved, and is unobservable. Identifying what the world is composed of and the order of that composition, cannot ever of itself concretely explain how it came to be.

So collectively, all of these researchers are wasting their time and are reporting nothing but errors? That's amusing but at the same time very sad.

[soterion]

I believe God reveals Himself in at least three ways, 1) scripture, 2) answered prayer and other providential acts, and 3) the physical creation.

All three are subject to correct interpretation. If proper interpretation is accomplished, then there will be no contradiction between what the scriptures say in relation to the other two forms of revelation. Any contradiction is due to the improper interpretation of one or more of the three forms of revelation.

I see no good reason to reject any examination of points 2 and 3 to help determine God's hand at work for the good of mankind. If God did it, then it is good to look at it and give Him credit as we rejoice in His power and grace. But it has to begin with a proper understanding of the scriptures in relation to what we are looking at regarding God's providence and the creation.

I would suggest that if there is an overall rejection of sciences that conflict with one's interpretation of scripture, then maybe there is a problem with how the scriptures are being interpreted by that one. That should, at least, be considered.

[4WD]

I would suggest that if there is an overall rejection of sciences that conflict with one's interpretation of scripture, then maybe there is a problem with how the scriptures are being interpreted by that one. That should, at least, be considered.

Such is never considered by any of those promoting YEC positions.  It is simply rejected out of hand.

[th1b.taylor]

Stop right there. How do you explain the findings of many experts that have never heard or seen the testimony of God's word?  From my experience it is only YEC "experts" that bend the facts to suit there bias. The majority of researchers out there have no axe to grind with God and many do not even think about it, they're just working in their given field and recording the results, but when you see those results you claim it to be a lie, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Brother,
There is one thing that all truth is based on, the Holy Word of YHWH!  It matters not who has or has not read it, it remains the only truth!  Those that contend the Bible contains have yet to show me the Heavenly Ordained Individual that can instruct us on what passages to keep in our Bible and which to burn and never read again.

And then there are the multiple assurances beginning with Duet 4:2 and after, I recall, once more in Deuteronomy there are other instances before the final instance at the end of Revelation 22.  Couple all of that with 2Tim 3:16 and it is obvious, as bad as Satan does not want us to eat the Word that it remain alive in us and the best way to accomplish his goal, just chip, chip until there is only pwa gravel left.  I wish you well but you are not right.

[4WD]

Brother,
There is one thing that all truth is based on, the Holy Word of YHWH!  It matters not who has or has not read it, it remains the only truth! 

I hesitate to call that a stupid statement because to do so will be seen as too harsh and demeaning.  But in truth that is precisely what it is.  God's word is indeed truth.  But to say that God's word is the only truth is simply wrong.  There are many things that are true and there are many truths that simply are not in God's word at all. For example prove from the Bible that the planet Mars exists; or prove that there is any planet in the entire universe except the earth.  Or prove that water is just H₂O, or that there is even such a thing as a molecule of water.

[Alan]

Brother,
There is one thing that all truth is based on, the Holy Word of YHWH!  It matters not who has or has not read it, it remains the only truth!  Those that contend the Bible contains have yet to show me the Heavenly Ordained Individual that can instruct us on what passages to keep in our Bible and which to burn and never read again.

And then there are the multiple assurances beginning with Duet 4:2 and after, I recall, once more in Deuteronomy there are other instances before the final instance at the end of Revelation 22.  Couple all of that with 2Tim 3:16 and it is obvious, as bad as Satan does not want us to eat the Word that it remain alive in us and the best way to accomplish his goal, just chip, chip until there is only pwa gravel left.  I wish you well but you are not right.

I agree that there is only one truth, it is also revealed to us by the natural which God has left for us to observe. He knew in His creation of mankind that we would be curious and inquisitive, for Him to purposely plant false blueprints to our existence makes no sense whatsoever. You simply cannot see past a fundamental belief, much the same as those that countered the heliocentric system to which we now know is undeniably true, fundamentalists were forced to reconsider their views much the same as fundamentalists will be forced to accept evolution when it can be explained and proven without a reasonable doubt.

[Amo]

So collectively, all of these researchers are wasting their time and are reporting nothing but errors? That's amusing but at the same time very sad.

2 Tim 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.............................................................................................
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

They are ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth because they reject the testimony of God's word in favor of their own theories and speculations which contradict the same. They are lovers of self more than lovers of God, trusting their own inclinations over the word of God. Therefore in the end yes, they have wasted their time and effort to support theories and speculations which will be found untrue when God returns and reveals the accuracy of His word. In the mean time, they may be praised and exalted as the expert purveyors of truth by fallen humanity in rebellion against the testimony of God's word.

[Amo]

I believe God reveals Himself in at least three ways, 1) scripture, 2) answered prayer and other providential acts, and 3) the physical creation.

All three are subject to correct interpretation. If proper interpretation is accomplished, then there will be no contradiction between what the scriptures say in relation to the other two forms of revelation. Any contradiction is due to the improper interpretation of one or more of the three forms of revelation.

I see no good reason to reject any examination of points 2 and 3 to help determine God's hand at work for the good of mankind. If God did it, then it is good to look at it and give Him credit as we rejoice in His power and grace. But it has to begin with a proper understanding of the scriptures in relation to what we are looking at regarding God's providence and the creation.

I would suggest that if there is an overall rejection of sciences that conflict with one's interpretation of scripture, then maybe there is a problem with how the scriptures are being interpreted by that one. That should, at least, be considered.

If by that you mean the rejection of deep time and the theory of evolution built upon the same, then you simply call theory factual established science, which it is not. You can of course suggest whatever you wish, but this will never make what you suggest so. A majority choosing one theory over another, will never make said theory scientific fact. Nor does the history of humanity support in ay way shape or form the idea that the majority are usually right.

[Amo]

I agree that there is only one truth, it is also revealed to us by the natural which God has left for us to observe. He knew in His creation of mankind that we would be curious and inquisitive, for Him to purposely plant false blueprints to our existence makes no sense whatsoever. You simply cannot see past a fundamental belief, much the same as those that countered the heliocentric system to which we now know is undeniably true, fundamentalists were forced to reconsider their views much the same as fundamentalists will be forced to accept evolution when it can be explained and proven without a reasonable doubt.

First, the Catholic Church which denied the heliocentric system is not fundamentalist. To the contrary it declares all fundamentalists as violent terrorists whether they practice violence or not. Second, the bible does not deny the heliocentric system it simply does not specifically address the issue at all. Even today while most know and believe the earth rotates and revolves around the sun, we still refer to sunset and sunrise as though the sun is moving around us instead of the rotation of the earth causing the same. References in scripture concerning this observation are from observable human perspective, not scientific study and or explanation in relation to the same. The creation account on the other hand, though not a scientific explanation, is addressing exactly the time frame and procedure of the same. Which account is backed up and verified by other scriptures concerning the same.