Age of the earth

[Vadergirl123]

If you're referring to this:



I did it to point out the absurdity of using a presuppositionalist argument, and to point out that you were using a double standard. I explained all of that in the post itself.

Also, the fact that Allah, Odin, or STIPBR never claimed any of these things is irrelevant because I honestly don't believe your god made these claims either. A book written by men who claimed divine inspiration contains claims that they claim were made your god.

This takes me back to one of the first questions I asked you: How do you know the book is accurate?

How do you know that when the authors of the Bible said "Thus saith the LORD..." they were telling the truth?

Your question wuld lead back to the argument we're having now...over how the way we act as humans shows that a God has to exist.

 

[Vadergirl123]

The Mahabharat is true because it is inspired by the Gods, so a lot in the bible is wrong because a lot of the bible contradicts the mahabharat.

I know the Mahabharat is inspired by Gods because the Mahabharat says so.

And this guy wrote it:

You see how he broke his tusk? that´s because he sacrificed his tusk to use it as a pen and write the Mahabharat. And you dare not believe int it! :cover:

Does the Mahabharat contradict itself? And sacrificing a tusk doesn't make your writing true...

 

[Vadergirl123]

If you're referring to this:



I did it to point out the absurdity of using a presuppositionalist argument, and to point out that you were using a double standard. I explained all of that in the post itself.

Also, the fact that Allah, Odin, or STIPBR never claimed any of these things is irrelevant because I honestly don't believe your god made these claims either. A book written by men who claimed divine inspiration contains claims that they claim were made your god.

This takes me back to one of the first questions I asked you: How do you know the book is accurate?

How do you know that when the authors of the Bible said "Thus saith the LORD..." they were telling the truth?

This isn't directly related to the argument but how would you logically prove God doesn't exist? I'm curious....

 

[Vadergirl123]

Just think about it for a while.

I don't see where you're going?

 

[Vadergirl123]

The claims made therein are addressed below.

CF210: Constancy of Radioactive Decay Rates
CD001: Geochronometry and closed systems
CD002: Geochronology and initial conditions

Your claims admit to making assumptions...the first one says "the decay rates of nuclides hasn't been observed to vary since their rates were directably measurable, AT LEAST WITHIN the LIMITS of accuracy. Also as to thge closed systems it says their so closely(within 1-3% of each other) That's pretty accurate but it's not absolute and the third one even says that some assumptions are reasonable. However just b/c an assumption is reasonable doens't make it correct.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

If you don't then you're implying you believe logic originated from somewhere.

No, you're the one that's doing that.

I've already said "I don't necessarily think it 'comes from' anywhere" twice now.

Maybe if I rephrase you'll understand where I'm coming from:

"I have no reason to believe it 'originated' anywhere."

(I say God created it)

Okay, prove it.

As to sense of logic, I mean knowing that certain things are absolutes(I probably should've worded it differently). For instance,"All men will die"

The idea that "all men will die" is based on experience. 10 out of 10 die.

As for "absolutes", that's not a concept I put much stock in. No one that I know of -outside of religion- deals in absolutes (except maybe the Sith ). There are ideas that we can be fairly certain of, but claiming that something is "absolute" is never wise.

You said Allah's always been in existence and the concept of knowledge comes from him." he doesn't claim he's always been in existence.

I explained this in an earlier post.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Your question wuld lead back to the argument we're having now...over how the way we act as humans shows that a God has to exist.

What, specifically, do we do that shows a god must exist? You haven't answered that question yet.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

This isn't directly related to the argument but how would you logically prove God doesn't exist? I'm curious....

I don't make that claim.

The burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim. If you claim a god exists, the onus is on you to prove your claim is right, not one me to prove its wrong. Logic 101.

 

[shawn001]

That ANYBODY thinks the earth is 6000 years old is flawed upstairs to begin with in 2012.

National Academy of Science

"However, the established scientific consensus is that Young Earth Creationism has no scientific basis. For example, a joint statement of IAP by 68 national and international science academies lists as established scientific fact that Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old and has undergone continual change; that life, according to the evidence of earliest fossils, appeared on Earth at least 3.8 billion years ago and has subsequently taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve; and that the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicates their common primordial origin"

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Your claims admit to making assumptions...the first one says "the decay rates of nuclides hasn't been observed to vary since their rates were directably measurable, AT LEAST WITHIN the LIMITS of accuracy.

Error bar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also as to thge closed systems it says their so closely(within 1-3% of each other) That's pretty accurate but it's not absolute

Doesn't need to be. A high-percent of accuracy is quite sufficient.

and the third one even says that some assumptions are reasonable. However just b/c an assumption is reasonable doens't make it correct.

Did you note why they say the assumptions are reasonable?

If I drop a ball, say ten times, and note that it falls to the ground each time, would it be reasonable to assume it will fall the eleventh time I drop it?

The assumptions they're making are based on observations, not blind speculation.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Not the bible as we have it today no, but the jews did have the old testament so that they would know God's authority.

No, they did not.
The written Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy)
The Oral Torah (Oral Laws)
The Nevi'im (Prophets)
The Ketuvim (Writings)

In fact the old testament promised that Jesus would come. Jesus fulfilled the old testament and replaced their laws

Only according to Christian tradition

And he himself quoted out of it.

Not surprising for a Jewish Rabbi

So "common sense" the you that God didn't create our planet?? Does "common snese" also mean not believing he created it in 6days??

Most theologians of the world today do not see it as literal

He was upset that someof the priest's had turned the law into something about THEM and didn't really care about God at all.

Much like AiG and other literalist Creationists

And weak faith?? How is believing in the bible as my absolute authority displaying "weak faith?"

You put your faith in the Bible. Not God and his creation.

And I don't have a problem with "scientific advancement"(as long as it doesn't contradict the bible)

Like Pi?

I'm glad we now have cars and other technological objects and medicines.

I am sure you are.

 

[shawn001]

Originally Posted by Vadergirl123
And I don't have a problem with "scientific advancement"(as long as it doesn't contradict the bible)


Like?

"The Inquisition condemned Galileo in 1633 because his teachings clashed with the Bible, which read: "God fixed the earth upon its foundation, not to be moved forever." Galileo was rehabilitated after 359 years. "


Galileo was right and this is wrong ""God fixed the earth upon its foundation, not to be moved forever."


So Vadergirl123, does the earth rotate around the sun or the sun around the earth? How do we know?

 

[darkendless]

Good lord I cannot believe that people actually believe that the earth is only 6000 years old. What were these people doing during science classes (ages 10-16)?

Its frightening that people hold such idiotic beliefs in the face of 23454567 pages of research that can be found with one click of a mouse.

These debates continue to happen on these boards. I don't think it's worth my time to sift through this thread and provide evidence that will be ignored anyway.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

I think so I personally believe it's 6,000 years old

The funny thing about facts is that we are not entitled to our own facts. You can go ahead and personally believe anything you like though.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

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

That is because you only heard "evidence" that it is only 6000 years old from some very vocal preachers I think.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

:yes:I believe the bible is the absolute authority on everything. And according to what it says the world is about 6,000 yrs old

You believe the Bible is the absolute authority on EVERYTHING? Are you sure about this? Does this include both the Old and the New Testaments? Have you read the Bible cover to cover?

 

[Me Myself]

Does the Mahabharat contradict itself? And sacrificing a tusk doesn't make your writing true...

What makes it true is that the Gods say it is true.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Okay then it's not circular reasoning. The bible is true because it's God's word and his word says it's true.

lol that is the very definition of circular reasoning! :biglaugh:

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

The Qur'an contradricts the bible so it can't be true. What's the Mahabharata? Does it contradict the bible? And does the blair witch project contradict the bible?

But but but.... The Q'uran claims it is the true word of god. Who am I to believe?

 

[Me Myself]

The Qur'an contradricts the bible so it can't be true. What's the Mahabharata? Does it contradict the bible? And does the blair witch project contradict the bible?

The bible contradicts the Mahabharat.

the Mahabharat is inspired by Gods.

that way, you know that the bible can only be wrong. It´s the word of the Gods. The bible cannot compete with the word of the Gods.