There ARE secular homeschoolers out there.
My homeschooling daughter was given a "creationist science" book by one of her cousins, and she flipped through it and
the entire time. She said she wants to use it as a room divider for her pet rabbit.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Age of the earth
- Thread starter Vadergirl123
- Start date
There ARE secular homeschoolers out there.
My homeschooling daughter was given a "creationist science" book by one of her cousins, and she flipped through it and
the entire time. She said she wants to use it as a room divider for her pet rabbit.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Agreed. I don't. However that's not an assumption. To say "You're assuming that you don't know" is nonsensical.
Apart from that which is not designed.
Again, you're acting as though chance and design are the only two options. How do you know that's not a false dichotomy?
If the Bible was inspired by god, you'd almost have to use something akin to the Omphalos Hypothesis to get there, in my opinion.
The Bible contains numerous basic errors that the all-knowing Creator of everything would not make.
IMO, God could do better than the Bible.
How do you know it wouldn't be an easy task?
Which the Bible isn't.
Which the Bible doesn't.
[Citation Needed]
Yes, it is. You could withhold belief until it's justified. I'm not telling you to do that. I'm simply saying the option is there.
There's no proof the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist either. In fact, you can't prove it doesn't exist. You can't prove leprechauns don't exist. You can't prove fairies don't exist. You can't prove Bigfoot doesn't exist. You can't prove Unicorns don't exist.
The fact that you can't prove something doesn't exist is not a good reason to believe that it does.
Last edited:
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
A circle with a diameter of 10 cubits would have a rounded circumference of 31 cubits, not 30.
3.14 x 10
The Bible's calculation of pi is wrong.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Are automobiles, computers and medicine assumptions? No, they're observable results.
scientific method sci·en·tif·ic method (sī'ən-tĭf'ĭk)
n.
The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.
Looncall
Well-Known Member
This is ignorant nonsense.
Numerous independent dating methods have been shown to agree well. These include not only several independent radiometric methods, but also non-radiometric methods and even several that involve actually counting annual phenomena (as you have been shown). If you wish to reject these dating methods, you must show how they are all in error yet still agree among themselves.
If you do not show how your claimed these errors arise, we must dismiss your opinion as nothing more than superstitious bigotry. Just claiming that assumptions are involved is not good enough. Show us the beef!
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
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
So what?
It's wrong. That's what.
What is described is an impossibility. It is a mathematical impossibility to have a circle with a diameter of 10 cubits and a circumference of 30 cubits.
So did the author make a mistake? Yes.
It is obvious the author of this passage was unaware that Pi=3.14.
Not a big surprise. Even the Chinese calculated Pi at 3 at that time. And the Babylonians calculated it at 3 1/8. The Egyptians figured it at (16/9)*2.
What this shows is that the authors of the Tanakh were limited by their very human understanding of the world at that time. And what was written 3 to 4 thousand years ago does not reflect our current understanding of the world.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
My bad. You're speaking from a purely YEC position and not from a contemporary position like those of Harold Camping or Charles Josias Bunsen.
You're all wrong in lieu of what we know about history, archeology, anthropology and geology. All confirm that "civilization" is well over 10,000 years old. There are cultures of people that go back before that.
See Here: Cradle of civilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The earliest signs of a process leading to sedentary culture can be seen in the Levant to as early as 12,000 BC, when the Natufian culture became sedentary; it evolved into an agricultural society by 10,000 BC."
Man has actually been on the planet for quite some time.
See Here: Human - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Humans (known taxonomically as Homo sapiens, Latin for "wise man" or "knowing man") are the only living species in the Homo genus. Anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago, reaching full behavioral modernity around 50,000 years ago."
I would say your estimates and understanding of the natural world are way off. Your bible shouldn't be used as a history, science or math book.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
Is it not possible that the Bible used symbolic language for the 6 day creation?
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Its alsready a proven fact the earth is billions of years old from many scientific methods. The YECers are dishonet and could careless about the actual science.
Show me a YEC scientific paper the earth is 6000 years old. Its not in the bible and its not science at all. It was disproven many times now in history. Back in the 1920's there was a big argument about the geologic history of Niagra falls. Nor do you understand dating methods and how far they have evolved and what types are used.
If you want to believe the earth is 6000 years old, dispite the millions and billions of facts that support it, that have already proven your beliefs wrong, that is your ignorace on all the sciences. Not sciences problem.
The ice cores go back a million years layer by layer. The shear volume of facts supporting the 4.57 billion year old Earth would blow you out of the water.
If you actually watch those videos they are very specific on the facts. Please tell me where they are not factual specifically. I don't think you even know about plate tectonics at all for one.
The dinosaurs lived for 180 million years and went extint 65 million years ago and did not live at the same time man did and before the dinosaurs, was another huge group of animals during the Permian period where 95% of all life on the planet died, called the great dying. They also went extint and then the dinosaurs evolved.
Mass extintions
Timeline : Discovery Earth : Discovery Channel
BBC Nature - Big Five mass extinction events
You have no education on geology, paleoclimitology, astronomy, chemistry, archeology, physiology, botony, biology or any of the sciences it would seem. You don't even have the bible right with the earth is 6000 years old. That's NOT in the bible.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
You're claiming you don't know if a God does or doesn't exist. You have to make an assumption to make the claim.
Something that happens by chance is usually spontaneous and random, something designed usually fits together so perfectly that it's hard to believe it just randomly happened.
Look around everything came from somewhere or it's either always been here(like God)..there's no other two options. Do you know of another choice?
What basic errors? Are you talking about contradictions or other things?
Hahaha how easy a task do you think it would be to get forty guys from different time periods, some of whom have never met,they all don't speak the same language and they come from different cultures, but they decide to individually(without consulting the others or teling them what they're going to write about) write a part of a book. That would not be a cohesive book....
How is it internally inconsistent?
What do you mean it doesn't have the same message throughout. The bible's message is redemption...Man sins, God promises a deliverer, Christ fulfills that promise, and God tells us what the future holds....
By citation do you mean you want the authors names?
They don't claim to be true. In fact I could probably find out who the person was who created leprauchans and bigfoot(I've never heard of the flying spaghetti monster though haha)
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Vadergirl123
Active Member
A creationist scientist would agree with automobiles, computers,and medicine but they still might say you're dating methods make incorrect assumptions.
Looncall
Well-Known Member
And they would still be lying through their teeth.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
My point is that both YEC and old earth believers ahve the smae evidence but make different assumption to get THEIR points across. However science can't prove how old the earth is. Here's a link for some "evidence" YEC present Evidence for a Young World - Answers in Genesis
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Why shoudln't I use it for science or history?
Vadergirl123
Active Member
What?? Why shoudl I post "evidence" for something I don't believe in. I mean I'm not going to ask you to post "evidence" for a young earth....
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Sure, but that would be contradicting hebrew poetry style the bible wasn't using symbolic language.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Ignorant savages??? Really? What makes those guys ignorant?? Because they don't share your beliefs they're ignorant? And savages, that's really unfair...they were human beings like me and you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Viker
Your beloved eccentric Auntie Cristal
Because it is not intended for either. It's more of a religious tome using analogy.