Age of the earth

[Vadergirl123]

That's the claim, but where's the evidence? Why should we trust and believe that claim, especially after examining the bible and finding inaccuracies, contradictions, inconsistencies, absurdities, atrocities, injustices, etc? Why would god gift us with the ability to reason, only for us to forgo its use? If there is a god, it would be a being of pure love and pure logic, therefore anything deficient in reason or compassion cannot be of god, and the bible fails that test.

Alright well I've heard that there were contradictions and I've heard the bible's infallibe. It's not innacurate. It's made prophetic claims that have come to pass. Is there a time it made a prophecy that was proven wrong(I'm looking up some of the contradictions now) What atrocities are you talking about? Why do you think God is unreasonable and uncompassionate?

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Sorry I thought I did, there's no way I can show he does/doesn't exist.(and there's no scientific evidence to prove he does/doesn't)I was showing how by making the assumption that he does exist and his word is true I can explain where our sense of absolutes come form.

But the assumption is meaningless. Just because you assume X is true does not make X true.

If you don't make the assumption he exists but instead assume doesn't

Honestly, I make no assumptions regarding god(s).

I don't know how'd you come to the conlcusion of where our sense of absolutes comes from(such as X=X, B doesn't equal A, etc)

That's an appeal to ignorance. The fact that you don't know how these things would come about without god does not mean that they therefore must have come from god. It simply means you don't know.

"I don't know, therefore I know!" :no:

 

[Vadergirl123]

I still have to ask why? Every argument you've made up to this point has failed. Upon what are you basing this 100% certainty, other than just assuming its so?

You've already said "No my believeing it doesn't make it true."

If belief doesn't make it so, and assuming it doesn't make it so, what does?

(Not trying to be a jerk about this. Just honestly confused.)

No it's okay I don't think you're a jerk haha and faith haha I can make three assumptions about God. I can assume he's not real, I can assume he is real, or I can assume there's no way to be certain. Every human being makes one of these assumptions. When I look around at this planet and look at science I can't help but think our planet was desinged by someone. I mean just how well everything fits together. It's incredible. I can't believe that all happened by chance. So I assume a Gd exists(I can't prove he does/doesn't) now of course their are hundreds of gods out there. I believe in Jehova b/c he says he wants a relationship with me, loves me enough to die for me, and I believe the bible(his word) is infallible. To have forty different men(all inspired by God) write a 66 book bible that fits togeter and doesn't contradict itself...it's so amazing. So no my believing and asssuming something doesn't make it true, but my belief and assumptions also don't make it false.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

However you can't be sure God doesn't exist,and that my assumptions are wrong.

Nice try at shifting the burden of proof.

First, I don't claim that no gods exist.

Secondly, It's not up to me to prove your god doesn't exist or prove your assumptions are false. The onus is on you to prove your claims, and assumptions, are valid.

I assume he does

Why?

(you don't know what to believe)

Nonsense.

 

[Vadergirl123]

But the assumption is meaningless. Just because you assume X is true does not make X true.



Honestly, I make no assumptions regarding god(s).



That's an appeal to ignorance. The fact that you don't know how these things would come about without god does not mean that they therefore must have come from god. It simply means you don't know.

"I don't know, therefore I know!" :no:

It also doesn't make it false

You assume you can't be certain there is one...

right I don't know how they'd come into being without him(I admited to that), so I believe he created them.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

No it's okay I don't think you're a jerk haha

Okay. I'm told I come off as harsh sometimes. It's not intentional.

I can make three assumptions about God. I can assume he's not real, I can assume he is real, or I can assume there's no way to be certain. Every human being makes one of these assumptions.

I don't.

When I look around at this planet and look at science I can't help but think our planet was desinged by someone. I mean just how well everything fits together. It's incredible.

What sets "design" apart? What, in your mind, makes something "designed"?

I can't believe that all happened by chance. So I assume a Gd exists(I can't prove he does/doesn't)

You're making the assumption that chance and design are the only two options. How do you know that's not a false dichotomy?

now of course their are hundreds of gods out there. I believe in Jehova b/c he says he wants a relationship with me, loves me enough to die for me,

No. A book, written by men claiming to speak for god, says those things.

and I believe the bible(his word) is infallible.

It's not, IMO.

To have forty different men(all inspired by God) write a 66 book bible that fits togeter and doesn't contradict itself...it's so amazing.

Not really. The fact that a large work with numerous contributing authors is internally consistent doesn't prove much. The authors were likely familiar with the earlier works.

That's really a moot point though as the Bible isn't internally consistent. It contradicts itself quite a bit, but that's for another thread

So no my believing and asssuming something doesn't make it true, but my belief and assumptions also don't make it false.

So, which is more reasonable, in your opinion:

1) To believe something is true until it's proven false.
2) To not believe something is true until it's proven true.

?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

About 4.5 billion years. That's what the experts say.

This here........

 

[Dirty Penguin]

What available "evidence?" I haven't heard of any "evidence" for the world being 4.5 billion years old.

Which is probably why you believe the world is 6000 years old......

Why would you believe it's 6000 and not 12/13000 as the bible seems to indicate..?

 

[The_Evelyonian]

faith

If I have faith that the Sun revolves around the Earth, will that make it so?

 

[Me Myself]

That's your opinon and my opinion is that the bible is superior to the Mahabharat, also the bible doesn't contradict itself(I'll post soemthing about that later today)

A lot of fictional novels don´t contradict themselves.

But the Mahabharat is the word of the Gods and that´s how you know the bible is not, because it contradicts the Mahabharat. Also contradicts the Upanishads and other great pieces of revelations form the Gods.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

And yet you place blind faith in the fables of ancient goat herders as if they were indisputable fact.

^^
This right here.

Can she have been left back, in home schooling?

 

[Vadergirl123]

Nice try at shifting the burden of proof.

First, I don't claim that no gods exist.

Secondly, It's not up to me to prove your god doesn't exist or prove your assumptions are false. The onus is on you to prove your claims, and assumptions, are valid.



Why?



Nonsense.

I wasn't trying to "shift the burden of proof" I was stating a fact, you CAN'T prove he doesn't(whether you wanted to or not) and I've already said I can't prove them. However I have no reason to believe they're not true.
I already gave some reasons why in a previous post
It's not nonsense. You said you make, "no assumptions concerning gods, or God," but that's not really true. Everyone assumes something. You just don't know whether to believe they exist or not.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

I wasn't trying to "shift the burden of proof" I was stating a fact, you CAN'T prove he doesn't

Nor do I have to. As I said, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. If you claim a god exists, you have the burden.

I've already said I can't prove them. However I have no reason to believe they're not true.

The fact that you can't show any of it is actually real is an excellent reason not to believe it, IMO.

It's not nonsense. You said you make, "no assumptions concerning gods, or God," but that's not really true.

Yes, it is.

Everyone assumes something. You just don't know whether to believe they exist or not.

I have no reason to believe they exist, therefore I don't.

It's not "I don't know whether to believe" - I. Do. Not. Believe.

-----

Let me ask you this: Which is more important to you?

1) Finding out what is actually true.
2) Preserving what you already believe to be true.

I'm not saying that the two are mutually incompatible. I'm simply wondering which is more important in your mind.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Okay. I'm told I come off as harsh sometimes. It's not intentional.



I don't.



What sets "design" apart? What, in your mind, makes something "designed"?


You're making the assumption that chance and design are the only two options. How do you know that's not a false dichotomy?



No. A book, written by men claiming to speak for god, says those things.



It's not, IMO.



Not really. The fact that a large work with numerous contributing authors is internally consistent doesn't prove much. The authors were likely familiar with the earlier works.

That's really a moot point though as the Bible isn't internally consistent. It contradicts itself quite a bit, but that's for another thread



So, which is more reasonable, in your opinion:

1) To believe something is true until it's proven false.
2) To not believe something is true until it's proven true.

?

Yes you do. you don't know whether a God or gods exist

I don't understand your question..set desgn apart from what? Happening by chance?
That's your opinion of the bible, but you can't prove/disprove that it wasn't inspired by God. You can just chose to assume it wasn't.

Possibly, but you can't be sure, some of the authors didn't even speak te same language or were born into different cultures. I mean it wouldn't be an easy task to create a book nowadays that was internally consistent, and had the same message throughout, which was written by 4o different men. And that's including all the technology we now have. Those guys didn't have the same resources.

Yes it is, and I'm still working on that thread hahaha
Well as I said the bible/God can't "be proven true" so the 2nd option isn't availabe. Therefore I take the first,and (excluding the contradictions for the bible, which I've heard have already been refuted) there's no 'proof' of God not existing.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Which is probably why you believe the world is 6000 years old......

Why would you believe it's 6000 and not 12/13000 as the bible seems to indicate..?

Where does the bible indicate that?

 

[Vadergirl123]

If I have faith that the Sun revolves around the Earth, will that make it so?

Nope you have to put your faith in something that's true, andI believe God is. And no my faith can't "prove" he's true. But there's also nothing that proves he's not true.

 

[Vadergirl123]

A lot of fictional novels don´t contradict themselves.

But the Mahabharat is the word of the Gods and that´s how you know the bible is not, because it contradicts the Mahabharat. Also contradicts the Upanishads and other great pieces of revelations form the Gods.

But those fictional novels are claiming to not be true. Hence the word "fictional" The bible doesn't claim to be a fictional book. I already said the Mahabharat contradicts itself. Why should I believe a book that is internally inconsistent??

 

[Vadergirl123]

1 Kings 7:23
He made the Sea of cast metal,
circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim
and five cubits high, It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.


Diameter = 10
Circumference =30

Now, since circumference = Pi x diameter (Basic geometry)
30 = Pi x 10
This calculates Pi as 3

The guy just rounded the length, so what?

 

[Vadergirl123]

These and the actual science behind them prove your Beliefs, totally wrong.

Its totally amazing you think the earth is 6000 years old. Its actually amazing in 2012 some people think this way and know so little science about our home planet earth.

I also don't think you know we have ice core samples going back a million years.

Paleoclimatology: The Ice Core Record :

"To pry climate clues out of the ice, scientists began to drill long cores out of the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica in the late 1960s. By the time Alley and the GISP2 project finished in the early 1990s, they had pulled a nearly 2-mile-long core (3,053.44 meters) from the Greenland ice sheet, providing a record of at least the past 110,000 years. Even older records going back about 750,000 years have come out of Antarctica. Scientists have also taken cores from thick mountain glaciers in places such as the Andes Mountains in Peru and Bolivia, Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, and the Himalayas in Asia."

Paleoclimatology: The Ice Core Record : Feature Articles


[youtube]Xs4yNL1M8Gg[/youtube]
How The Earth Was Made.The Ring Of Fire. - YouTube


[youtube]RcOcWBDlFik[/youtube]
How the Earth Was Made: New York - YouTube


[youtube]UizPBG4mzqg[/youtube]
How The Earth Was Made.Yellowstone. - YouTube


[youtube]IhRK-RUGwbE[/youtube]
How The Earth Was Made.Iceland. - YouTube


I also don't think you know where the 6000 year old earth idea came from, because it wasn't the bible.

If you've been following this thread then you already know I've said countless times that science makes assumptions(specifically in dating methods), and there's no way to KNOW for sure the absolute age of the earth based on science alone. Both YEC and believeers of an old earth have the SAME evidence but interpret it differently. However I'd be very interested in knowing why the earth can't be 6,000yrs old according to the bible.

 

[Vadergirl123]

And yet you place blind faith in the fables of ancient goat herders as if they were indisputable fact.

I think only one of the authors might've been a goat herder, and it's not fables. You look at science, which makes assumptions, and take all it says as indisputable facts.