SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
The evolutionist and billion of years people think they know so much. Vanity.
-
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!
Challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
Total rubbish, you are assuming the poorly named big bang was an explosion, it was not, it was an inflation.
Again wrong, the initial inflationary period occured at several times the speed of light, only light didnt exist then and could not exist until the temperature dropped enough for photons to form which was around 1/4 million years after the bb event
Thats how science works, something is discovered and shown to meet the criteria then it is adopted
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I see no disagreement, what i do see is misunderstanding.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I just noted that the Big Bang needed to be modified by Inflation because certain observations were inconsistent with it. It should have been announced on national news, TV, radio, and print. Instead it went with a tiny whimper.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Still nothing yet. Without using an unproven assumption, no one can prove that anything is older than about 6000 years.
It's lucky for Newton that Ussher get stuck with this blame. Of course they both assumed the Bible was reliable and true.
Who says this is true? Scholars inform us that there were dozens of humn authors for Bible stories.
How do you know? You are assuming a lot of fantastic things here. I'm not convinced.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Of course there were multiple authors, but God inspired the whole thing. The multiple authors though is part of another proof that the Bible is true and hence God created all things.
So why doesn't all of science agree with you? You just happen to be correct but all the experts in science, which includes believers, are idiots and liars? Notice you aren't offering us evidence that you are correct in your belief, just claiming experts in science are wrong because they dare defy you. It's as if you think yourself a God.
Last edited:
Who observed the bb?
And of course, any discoveries are made public through the scientific method , if your media choses to ignore them it is hardly the fault of scoence
Deliberately ignoring the evidence or making false assumptions does not make facts or evidence go away
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
So why do those that use the no God assumption do it?
You haven't explained why you assume your interpretation of the Bible is accurate. The evidence posted to you was rejected, so why are you assuming yourself educated enough to dismiess work by experts? You haven't offered us evidence that you are well informed.
Because there is no valid evidence to ignore. More to the point, why do those who believe on god without falsifiable evidence do it
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
We don't assume there's no God, we just have no reason to assume there is. Would you say that someone who thinks grass grows without the aid of magical pixies are engaging in a "no pixie" assumption?
Why should anyone assume a God when all you offer is stories in a Book? Why are you assuming these stories are true and accurate?
Secret Chief
Very strong language
So why assume the humans authors were telling the absolute truth and not embellishing stories?
How is that, they were human and still flawed, yes? You are a sinner and flawed yourself, yes? Or are you a God?
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I am not God and neither are the evolutionists
The Bible proves itself.
I have 5 already, coming soon.