The earth is 13,000 years old and it is soon to be renewed when Christ comes

[FFH]

Ah, so it wasn't meant to be hidden after all!

Please get your story straight.

As I have explained in the previous post, these things are hidden from the world/wicked. Sorry if I didn't make that clarification earlier...

Luke 8: 10

Jesus speaking to his disciples

And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

 

[FFH]

Well, according to the Bible, it was all supposed to happen thousands of years ago, as Jesus told his followers it would happen before they died.

Yes, much of what Christ said applied to them and their generation as it applies to ours.

The same scripture may apply to them and their time, as it does with us, in our time, when we will see Christ set up his kingdom on earth, as he attempted to do 2,000 years ago, but this time we will accept him as the Messiah, and his kingdom will be established on the earth and will not fail...

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

Not only, in the Baha'i view, has the Second Coming of the Christ Spirit already happened (around a century and a half ago), but the Baha'i scriptures assert that the age of the earth--and of the universe in general--is far older than what the "experts" had long stated!

So meaning no offense, I fear your subject assertion is a non-starter for me.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, much of what Christ said applied to them and their generation as it applies to ours.

The same scripture may apply to them and their time, as it does with us, in our time, when we will see Christ set up his kingdom on earth, as he attempted to do 2,000 years ago, but this time we will accept him as the Messiah, and his kingdom will be established on the earth and will not fail...

okay, I'll make this simple for you.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Jesus is talking to his friends way back then, and says that "All these things" will happen BEFORE HIS FRIENDS DIE.

The things he spoke of can be found Matthew 24:6-14. They include wars, rumours of wars, famines, pestilences, earthquakes, hatred of Jewish people, offense, betrayal, more hatred, widespread deception by false prophets, iniquity and the love of many will become cold and then the end of the world - "and then shall the end come", jesus says. Then Jesus says to his friends - mortal living humans who lived TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO that they will STILL BE ALIVE when these things happen.

So the end of the world was meant to happen during the lifetimes of people who live two thousand years ago. The Bible is very clear.

 

[painted wolf]

its intresting that "Dr." Carl Edward Baugh doesn't have a degree from an accredited university.
Infact two of his " degrees" are from the unaccredited school he runs himself.

very suspicious if you ask me.

The sad thing is there are people with genuine educational credentials out there who do make Creationist arguments.
Both Answers in Genesis and Answers in Creation for instance warns fellow Christian Creationists away from him.

wa:do

 

[Tiberius]

There will always be a false opposing postition to these things on either side...

Let us all examine the data and decide for ourselves...no need to hash over it excessively...

If I see something in any of your posts that needs a rebuttal I will do so. But for now it's just my link against your link...

No need to give our comentaries, we are not the experts....

Sorry to bring this up again, but I really can't understand how you feel that your position is supported by the links you provided, but then, when each and every point is demolished, you claim that it's unimportant (you said that my rebuttal was not worth responding to, indicating that you think the loss of so much support doesn't harm your case all that much.).

How is it that your sources were so valuable as to be worthy of inclusion to support your claims, yet their destruction doesn't even warrant a response?

I propose that if your sources are really that valuable for your argument, then you have a responsibility to explain why my response was incorrect. if you don't, then your sources can't have been that valuable, and therefore don't merit inclusion in this argument.

However, once we eliminate your supporting "evidence", your argument becomes nothing more than, "This is the way it all is, because that's my interpretation of the Bible, and I really really REALLY think it's all true" and your argument becomes as persuasive and valid as a 5 year old child saying, "But I DO believe in Santa Clause! I DO! I DO!"

 

[FFH]

Tiberius, I was impressed that you found links that directly challenged my links. I was amazed that someone had already addressed and opposed Dr. Baugh's claims...however I don't believe those claims against Dr. Baugh's positions are anything but an attempt to discredit him and his studies, which agree with my belief that the earth is young.

Dr. Baugh believes the earth is 6,000 years old, which obviously disagrees with my position, but the point of posting his theories is to give evidences pointing to the fact that the earth is young.. I think he's done a good job in illustrating that point. Simple research to a simple question, "Is the earth young or old"...

I'm not going to add any comments to what Dr. Baugh has already said concerning his young earth creation theories, but I do want people to know that I believe his theories to be true, which agrees with the Bible account, which seems to suggest a young earth creation model... The material, the earth is composed of, may be old, but the formation of that material was recent, within thousands of years, not millions...

It's not that I don't think what you have posted is worthy of a response, It just seems pointless to say anymore about either postion. You have posted direct responses/opposing viewpoints of what I have posted by Dr. Baugh..., which again I find amazing that someone would take the time to oppose his studies point by point. This tells me that he has credible arguments, for someone to take notice of them and take the time to oppose each evidence pointing to that fact that the earth is young....

It's funny because in another thread, I started, I posted a link to a Christian viewpoint about such and such and immediately someone posted an opposing link, which directly and exactly opposed each particular point I had posted a link to.

It became a link debate... It seems whatever is out there, there is an opposing view just a click away...

Again you could not have posted a more direct response to Dr. Baugh's arguments that the earth is young....Someone has obviously gone through each of his claims and posted a response on the web for anyone to link up to and post...

What more can either of us say concerning each theory ???

It comes down to a matter of faith, because these things are hard to prove beyond a doubt, although I have seen some pretty compelling evidences that suggest a very young earth.....

 

[FFH]

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 1 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 2 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 3 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 4 of 9

 

[FFH]

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 5 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 6 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 7 of 9

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation, Part 8 of 9

 

[FFH]

Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation Part 9 of 9

According to this series the earth is 10's of 1.000's of years old, not less than 10,000, not more than 100,000, but 10's of 1.000's...

 

[Tiberius]

Okay, I am on dial up so I'm not going to be able to load all those videos to show that their claims of a young earth are wrong.

If you care to summarise for me, I'll deal with that.

And think for yourself instead of just posting links, will you? When I responded to you the last time you did this, only a part of my information was from links, the rest of it was from things I have learnt throughout my life. Are you actually capable of providing a scientific argument in your own words? I think not.

And do you actually research these, or just find things that say what you want to hear and post them without actually seeing the full picture?

And since you obviously think these videos offer actual proof of a young earth, if I disprove these, will you stop wasting our time? There is ZERO scientific evidence supporting creation. I have seen pretty much every argument there is and I have been able to refute it. There isn't a single argument I have heard that I can't refute. And you sure as heck aren't saying anything new.

 

[gnostic]

Tiberius, I was impressed that you found links that directly challenged my links. I was amazed that someone had already addressed and opposed Dr. Baugh's claims...however I don't believe those claims against Dr. Baugh's positions are anything but an attempt to discredit him and his studies, which agree with my belief that the earth is young.

The fact of the matter is that all Baugh's degrees come from non-accredited universities. And as Painted Wolf had pointed out, two of his degrees come from university (Pacific International University) where he is running the shows.

its intresting that "Dr." Carl Edward Baugh doesn't have a degree from an accredited university.
Infact two of his " degrees" are from the unaccredited school he runs himself.

very suspicious if you ask me.

Discredit him, FFH? Possibly, but the fact remained that his degrees are suspicious, because anyone with enough money can buy doctorates for lump sum at Pacific International University. Staff of the university can get Masters and PhD without even studying the courses.

Check out Pacific International University.

It is also the same university that keep spamming my old email account with offer of degrees, PhDs of my choice for a hefty price. To me, the so-called "Dr" Baugh is nothing but fraud and running fraudulent university, and I am not talking about his young earth theory, but that's also a fraud too. He even has a smile of car-salesman or US politician, totally untrustworthy.

 

[FFH]

From part 4 of the previously posted lecture by Spke Psarris, "Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation".

The sun is 400 times further away from the moon and is 400 times larger than the moon. On top of that it eclipses the sun perfectly every X number of years...

Is this a random coincidence, or evidence of an intelligent creator ???

This is just a sample of what's in this video lecture by Spike Psarris, a former military space program engineer.

 

[astarath]

From part 4 of the previously posted lecture by Spke Psarris, "Our Solar System: Evidence for Creation".

The sun is 400 times further away from the moon and is 400 times larger than the moon. On top of that it eclipses the sun perfectly every X number of years...

Is this a random coincidence, or evidence of an intelligent creator ???

This is just a sample of what's in this video lecture by Spike Psarris, a former military space program engineer.

This is a seperate question for a seperate post

 

[painted wolf]

The sun is 110x the diameter of the Earth (the moon is 1/3rd the size of Earth)
12000x the surface volume of Earth
1,300,000x the mass of Earth

About a million Earths would fit in the Sun... The sun is not 400x the size of the moon.

as for eclipses that isn't so surprizing or in need of a creator... given how often the Earth and the moon revolve its just a matter of time before they line up. Simple probability.

wa:do

 

[cardero]

Scriptures concerning Christ's coming are obscure, which they are meant to be, in order to hide them from the world.

Why would Christ hide this information from the world? What would happened if we did discover the time and day?

 

[SoyLeche]

The sun is 110x the diameter of the Earth (the moon is 1/3rd the size of Earth)
12000x the surface volume of Earth
1,300,000x the mass of Earth

About a million Earths would fit in the Sun... The sun is not 400x the size of the moon.

as for eclipses that isn't so surprizing or in need of a creator... given how often the Earth and the moon revolve its just a matter of time before they line up. Simple probability.

wa:do

The interesting part is that from our perspective they appear to be the same size (I'm trying to remember my astronomy vocabulary: they subtend the same angle - is that the right word???). I'll admit, that could just be coincidence, but it's still interesting.

 

[painted wolf]

right because god figured we just wouldn't be able to handle them being seperate apparent sizes.

wa:do

 

[SoyLeche]

right because god figured we just wouldn't be able to handle them being seperate apparent sizes.

wa:do

yeah, something like that

Actually, if God did it there was probably some reason - most likely some symbolic teaching or something like that. I'm sure FFH will come in and make one up for us.

 

[SoyLeche]

yeah, something like that

Actually, if God did it there was probably some reason - most likely some symbolic teaching or something like that. I'm sure FFH will come in and make one up for us.

I should probably state my position. I do believe that God created the Universe, and he did so with a purpose. I also believe that it is most likely that this creation occured over billions of years, not over a couple of thousand.

When looking at the apparent sizes of the sun and the moon, and the fact that they subtend the same angle, that seems to me to be a bit too unlikely to be a coincidence, so it acts as evidence to me that God actually is in charge.

I am not naive enough to think that this constitutes proof to someone that doesn't already believe that God is in charge though.