Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
You need more faith in God's science. (and a little less gullibility)
and what is 'Gods science' exactly?
-
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!
how long do you think humans have been on earth?
- Thread starter kloth
- Start date
and what is 'Gods science' exactly?
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
i wouldnt exactly call that 'Gods science'
In your view of things, who created your ability to reason logically and weigh empirical evidence? Satan?
Secret Chief
Degrow!
In some parts of the world, we're still waiting.
Actually Pegg, and all other YEC believers, this chronology, the date of 4000 BCE is not based on the Bible. That's a common error of belief among modern Protestant Biblical literalists. It was Bishop Usher who set that date way back in the 1600's, meticulously using what available resources there were to set such a date. His use of the Bible's chronologies are NOT the basis for that date as there are gaps and holes in reconciling dates that it could not stand on its own as the source for that date. Didn't know that, I'll bet.
In fact, Bishop Usher's use of the Bible constituted less than 1/6th of his source material. This hardly becomes a debate about Bible authority versus science in light of that, since he did not rely on the Bible for that date. Right? He was not alone in coming up with a date of around 4000 BCE at that time, way back in the 1600s with the resources they had on hand. Among them was Sir Isaac Newton and Johannes Kepler who place the date of creation around that time as well. They were not using the Bible for that date. They were not theologians defending the Bible against science. They were science!
Bishop Usher in fact wasn't really concerned about earth history outside human history. His work wasn't meant to chronicle the age of the earth, but the age of man. In fact, he saw the account of a literal six day creation somewhat puzzling, as in his mind he couldn't imagine why six whole days was necessary for God! His work was consistent with those other scholars of the day working with what they had available. This was not a religious study. It was their earlier attempts at understanding history.
We know lots, and lots more today and have tons and tons more resources available to us. If Kepler, Newton, and Bishop Usher had available to them what we do today, there is no way they would have come up with a date of 4000 BCE. No way. These were scientists and scholars, not religious hacks. They were interested in discovering truths about the world, not defending their dogma. If you don't believe that about Usher, how on earth could you believe it about Newton and Kepler? They were all the same. They were not Protestant hacks misusing science and the Bible to defend their beliefs against science, as we see today.
So, now, in light of this. How can you stay married to such an antiqued understanding of dating human history? Again, he relied on the Bible for less that 1/6th of his dating method. If the Bible literally spelled out that date, then he would have not had to do the painstaking work he had in filling gaps in using material form other cultures available at that time. YEC is a profound misunderstanding of Biblical scholarship, history, and science. It's nothing better than stubborn dogma based on pure religious bias.
Last edited:
DallasApple
Depends Upon My Mood..
But how can you prove that to me? I'm only 45.
InformedIgnorance
Do you 'know' or believe?
Actually, taking that approach - can one prove that we existed before I wrote this post? Maybe the universe sprang into being with humans in our current level of technological development, with each individual specifically crafted in such a way as to have memories of events that never happened.
We get to a point where the level of evidence is such that there is no reasonable doubt as to our existence at any one stage of history and that holds true for WELL over ten thousand years.
We get to a point where the level of evidence is such that there is no reasonable doubt as to our existence at any one stage of history and that holds true for WELL over ten thousand years.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
well firstly, im not a YEC. The earth has been here for a lot longer then mankind.
The date of 4026 is a JW date for the creation of the first man Adam. It has nothing to do with the earth or biship Usher.
JW's have always stated that the earth is billions of years old as science suggests.
I.S.L.A.M617
Illuminatus
Humans as we exist now? History estimates we've been here in our current state since around 10,000 BCE. This is where we see the first evidence of recording history in the form of cave drawings.
You're joking, or they are? It sounds like they simply "tweaked" Usher to make themselves sound unique (I understand groups like the JW's as the one I was in was similar). If it isn't some tweak of Usher to make themselves look unique, as I well suspect, then what was their science involved? And more than that, if they did conclude that, they were wrong. Point blank. There is evidence of humans long before 4000 BCE. The only way a date of 4000 BCE would be right is if you said that even though they were upright on two feet, looked like us, talked like us, had societies like us, etc, they weren't us until something transformed humanoids, into "humans". In other words, human primates, suddenly became "Adam and Eve", transformed from their human bodies to human "people", from animals to mankind in a miracle of intervention of some sort.
No, that 4000 BCE range is totally Usher. The Watchtower is hardly a group of actual researchers. They were a product of the age in America society, one of numerous similar groups arising at the same time and period in American history, products of the whole movement of religion following the Great Disappointment. Usher, all the way. "But no, we're unique! It's not October 23, 4004 BC as Usher said, it's 4026 BCE, a fully 22 years earlier!!" Absurd. How absurd.
Freelance_Policeman
Member
Depends on what you mean by "human." If you mean a being with neshama, then maybe 8,000-12,000 years. Evolved monkeys are much older though.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
and yet the first true written human languages only go back as far as 5,000 bce.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
But writing wasn't really needed for their survival, so it wasn't exactly something they bothered with.
We have earlier writing though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-writing
"Example of the Jiahu symbols, a writing-like markings, found on tortoise shells were dated around 6000 BC."
It's not "true" writing, but it's still a form of written communication.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
But writing wasn't really needed for their survival, so it wasn't exactly something they bothered with.
We have earlier writing though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-writing
"Example of the Jiahu symbols, a writing-like markings, found on tortoise shells were dated around 6000 BC."
It's not "true" writing, but it's still a form of written communication.
and still only approximately 6,000 years old!
Humans are the only species who use this type of written communication. If there are any humans like us in the far past, there is no reason why they would not make the same types of records as we make.
But the fact is that all known writings systems are within the last 5/6,000 odd years.
Is it all possible that our particular species is younger then scientists claim?
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
You're out by a few thousand years, but I understand.
As mentioned, there was little need for writing systems. Writing systems developed in countries with agriculture. Hunter-gatherers had no need for true writing.
The creation of a writing material, whether vellum, papyrus, or paper, is no easy feat. In addition, things decay. It's possible that a writing system existed even further back, but no evidence survives.
You're ignoring cave paintings as a form of communication, however, when I don't think this works. We have cave paintings and petroglyphs from 30,000 years ago, such as this one:
Burrup Peninsula rock art among oldest in world - Australian Geographic
>30,000 years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Abra
(16,400 years)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...eanderthal-cave-paintings-spain-science-pike/
(believed to possibly be from Neanderthals!)
BBC News - Red dot becomes 'oldest cave art'
>40,000 years old
Caladan is an archaeologist. It may be worth chatting with him.
Unfortunately, it isn't really possible because so much evidence points to the contrary.
So I'm clear on the position of religious groups that claim humans are no more older than 5000 BCE, they are claiming something like a 'soul' entered into an existing life form that transformed them into "human"? But that we therefore can find biological "proto-humans" then back to 200,000 BCE and not violate the religious belief that 'Adam and Eve' were created 4000 some odd years BCE?
4026 BCE ...
5000 BCE ...
Apparently, JW innumeracy is one of the casualties of JW 'science'.6600 BCE ...
And, apparently, some questions prove too awkward to answer.In your view of things, who created your ability to reason logically and weigh empirical evidence? Satan?i wouldnt exactly call that 'Gods science'FYI ...and what is 'Gods science' exactly?You need more faith in God's science. (and a little less gullibility