Age of the earth

I had never though about the fact that Fossilization would have to happen in a perfect set of conditions as animals do rot away when out in the open.


Manny

Originally posted by menace71
Is there any evidence for the Ort Cloud ? I know the comet argument is brought up all of the time ?


Manny

There is no evidence for any Ort Cloud. It is only a theory made up to counter the comet argument.

The Instructor

Originally posted by menace71
I had never though about the fact that Fossilization would have to happen in a perfect set of conditions as animals do rot away when out in the open.


Manny

Evilutionists don't want you to think about it. They just want you to believe them and kiss their arses.

The Instructor

Originally posted by menace71
It is fair to say that the earth has to be billions of years old if Evolution is true ?


Manny

No.

Evolution is a process that we observe happening all the time.

Evolution is observable.

What does require deep time is all life evolving from a common ancestor.

So common descent requires deep time to be true.

The process of Evolution itself doesn't.

Originally posted by menace71
Is there any evidence for the Ort Cloud ? I know the comet argument is brought up all of the time ?


Manny

I don't know what you mean by 'the comet argument'... But there is definitely evidence for the
Oort Cloud.

It has not been directly observed. The comets are too dark and small and distant to see.

But given the age of the solar system and the fact that comets orbits are unstable and that they
lose a significant proportion of their mass on every solar approach.
Then there must be a source of new comets otherwise they would have all disappeared by now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Hypothesis

In 1932, Estonian astronomer Ernst Öpik postulated that long-period comets originated in an orbiting cloud at the outermost edge of the Solar System.[9] In 1950, the idea was independently revived by Dutch astronomer Jan Hendrik Oort as a means to resolve a paradox:[10] over the course of the Solar System's existence, the orbits of comets are unstable; eventually, dynamics dictate that a comet must either collide with the Sun or a planet, or else be ejected from the Solar System by planetary perturbations. Moreover, their volatile composition means that as they repeatedly approach the Sun, radiation gradually boils the volatiles off until the comet splits or develops an insulating crust that prevents further outgassing. Thus, reasoned Oort, a comet could not have formed while in its current orbit, and must have been held in an outer reservoir for almost all of its existence.[10][11][12]

There are two main classes of comet, short-period comets (also called ecliptic comets) and long-period comets (also called nearly isotropic comets). Ecliptic comets have relatively small orbits, below 10 AU, and follow the ecliptic plane, the same plane in which the planets lie. Nearly all isotropic comets have very large orbits, on the order of thousands of AU, and appear from every corner of the sky.[12] Oort noted that there was a peak in numbers of nearly isotropic comets with aphelia (their farthest distance from the Sun) of roughly 20,000 AU, which suggested a reservoir at that distance with a spherical, isotropic distribution.[12] Those relatively rare comets with orbits of about 10,000 AU have probably gone through one or more orbits through the Solar System and have had their orbits drawn inward by the gravity of the planets.

Originally posted by menace71
I had never though about the fact that Fossilization would have to happen in a perfect set of conditions as animals do rot away when out in the open.


Manny

Fossilization doesn't require a 'perfect' set of conditions but fossilization is pretty rare
as it does require a pretty specialised set of conditions.

The reason we have so many fossils is due to the vast periods of time which allow for
rare events to happen many times.

Even so we would not expect to find fossils of everything, and there is a selection bias
for finding fossils of things that lived in conditions more suited for creating fossils.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You need to depart from the false teachers you are listening to.

[b]In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw the light, th g all manner of vegetation.

That is the correct understanding.

The Instructor

I only suspected you were rude and a fool, then I read some of your posts and all doubt was removed..🙂

RJHInds,

And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.

(Genesis 1:29-30 NKJV)

Notice what God gave for food. So it was okay to eat herbs and the fruit of the trees. But we were not to destroy the plants themselves. We were not to pull the trees up by the roots, so that it would die when we ate the fruit. Cows can eat grass and we can mow our yards without killing the plants.

A piece of fruit grows. An apple or peach or grapes grow. So I think we must count a piece of fruit as a living thing. So though I can see not pulling up by the roots, ie. a fruit tree, the fruit plucked off and eaten is a living thing.

No details are given about the preparation of "herb yielding seeds". I could not so dogmatically assert that some preparation of herb yielding seeds did not involve pulling up the whole plant.

Someone informs me - "A seed contains an embryo, which is a living organism. When placed into a proper environment, it develops into its adult form. Something dead cannot develop into something alive."

If a seed is dead and life can only come from life and not non-life, then you have to count the seeds Adam ate as living. They must have died then in his digestive system. What does that do to your belief that Romans 5:12 forbids any death to have occurred until after the sin of Adam ?

So the problem all started when man decided not to listen to God's instructions, but to do as they saw fit. God did not tell Adam to pull the plants up by the roots and eat the roots, like we do today, did He? So I see no contradiction with what Paul said in the letter to the Christians in Rome.

Specifically the fall into sin (the problem) occurred when the couple ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

No details are given about the preparation of vegetables or seed yielding herbs or every tree yielding seeds. Based on the lack of details I don't feel comfortable dogmatically insisting I know how such meals were prepared.

Please comment further on this if you can.

In addition I want to ask you, do you regard no death including animals ? If so would you not have multiplying creatures into trillions of never dying offspring exponentially ? I mean insects, fish, birds reproducing individuals each never dying ?

Or do you imagine there being just a representative number of individuals of each creature that would not die and not reproduce another ?

What do you think ?

Originally posted by sonship
RJHInds,

[quote] And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for foo ...[text shortened]... of each creature that would not die and not reproduce another ?

What do you think ?

I think it is better for us to stick to what we know, rather than to speculate on what we don't know. I am not good at such speculating. We only know what we have been told happened, but I believe God had a plan worked out if Adam and Eve had not sinned.

God made plants to produce food for animals. So it is true that apples and grapes contain living cells, when we eat them and our bodies somehow converts them to be useful in our own bodies. I don't know all the details of how that process works, but I do not consider that killing. Apparently, God doesn't either.

The Instructor

Originally posted by googlefudge
Fossilization doesn't require a 'perfect' set of conditions but fossilization is pretty rare
as it does require a pretty specialised set of conditions.

The reason we have so many fossils is due to the vast periods of time which allow for
rare events to happen many times.

Even so we would not expect to find fossils of everything, and there is a ...[text shortened]... as
for finding fossils of things that lived in conditions more suited for creating fossils.

I understand on the fossilization.....the radiometric dating however in theory should be precise



Manny

I think it is better for us to stick to what we know, rather than to speculate on what we don't know.

I am sticking to the text that fruit and herbs were given to Adam for food.
That is why I said that I do no KNOW in what ways they prepared meals of fruit and herbs. I can only speculate.

I think I know that a seed or a piece of fruit is a living thing. I think I know that it dies when eaten. I don't think that fruit will ripen or grow anymore once it is eaten. Same for an herb.

This would be the death of something. But Morris, Gish, Hovind and other YECs make a huge deal that NO DEATH was in the world before Adam sinned, via Romans 5:12.

I am trying to get an idea how they factor in this death of vegatation into their strong view of Romans 5:12.

I am not good at such speculating.

Oh come on RJ ! You speculate about moon dust, starlight, Carbon 14 dating, dinosaurs on Noah's ark and a lot of things. When you defend what you think is the true orthodox, one and only interpretation of the flood you do offer speculations about science and biblical matters.

Now if I go out and say "The Instructor said this" and someone asks me about dying vegetation when Adam ate, I want to know what should I say you instructed.

We only know what we have been told happened, but I believe God had a plan worked out if Adam and Eve had not sinned.

God made plants to produce food for animals. So it is true that apples and grapes contain living cells, when we eat them and our bodies somehow converts them to be useful in our own bodies. I don't know all the details of how that process works, but I do not consider that killing. Apparently, God doesn't either.

Then there may be some limitations on how we should take Romans 5:12. But YECs are very strong on this verse. So they say there could be NO DEATH in any pre-Adamic time and no DEATH until the fall of Adam.

According to their own strictness it may not include the DEATH of living things Adam ate for food.

So maybe Answers in Genesis should not be too zealous to beat up on someone who considers that our view of "the world" and of "death" coming into the world, may need some careful re-consideration.

An eaten herb is the death of that herb.
And the if the serpent LIED that was sinning in the world too if we understand "the world" as the whole universe in which Adam found himself.

"Therefore just as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin, death; and thus death passed on to all men because all have sinned - " (Rom. 5:12)

This is the YEC's strong verse to correct any understanding of a pre-adamic world in which sin and death for pre-adamic creature took place.

Maybe they are missing something in their understanding of the world and death coming into the world.

Originally posted by sonship

I think it is better for us to stick to what we know, rather than to speculate on what we don't know.

I am sticking to the text that fruit and herbs were given to Adam for food.
That is why I said that I do no KNOW in what ways they prepared meals of fruit and herbs. I can only speculate.

I think I know that a seed or a piece of fr g something in their understanding of the world and death coming into the world.

As I said before, God and I do not consider eating grasses, herbs, and the fruit of the vines and trees as the death of plants. I can't help that you have a different view.

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
As I said before, God and I do not consider eating grasses, herbs, and the fruit of the vines and trees as the death of plants. I can't help that you have a different view.

The Instructor

And I can't help it if you really cannot explain everything while you insist YEC is the only valid understanding of Genesis.

So I guess that leaves us even.

Originally posted by sonship
And I can't help it if you really cannot explain everything while you insist YEC is the only valid understanding of Genesis.

So I guess that leaves us even.

Well since I am not good enough to explain it to you, I'll refer you to another source. They have a slightly different understanding than I do, however, it is close enough to do.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/03/02/satan-the-fall-good-evil-could-death-exist-before-sin

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well since I am not good enough to explain it to you, I'll refer you to another source. They have a slightly different understanding than I do, however, it is close enough to do.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/03/02/satan-the-fall-good-evil-could-death-exist-before-sin

The Instructor

So you send me off to read this article. Well, I gave it a quick read through. And some things are there I will comment on.

The tone is the usual YEC accusation of guilt by association. If you don't see it their way you are siding with atheists.

This sentence -

The Bible tells us very clearly that there was no death before sin from many passages. In fact, there are no Bible verses indicating there was death prior to sin.

I think he refers to Romans 5:12 which says through Adam's sin death came into the world. There was sin before Adam sinned or there would not be a Satan.

I do not agree with his explanation because of Revelation 20:13-14 which I have explained on this Forum before. I still stand by it.

The DEAD in the sea are not dead human beings.

"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, each [of them], according to their works."

Every human being who dies goes to Hades. So when the Bible says Hades gave up the dead that includes all human beings who have died.

Those who died on land have their souls in Hades.
Those who died on a mountain go to Hades.
Those who died in a desert go to Hades.
Those who drowned at SEA also went to Hades.

"And the SEA gave up the dead which were in it ..." is in addition to the dead humans who are all in Hades.

These DEAD in the sea refers to demonic beings. They too will be judged at the great white throne for their sins.

Those people who died by drowning in Noah's flood OR in any other watery death are included in the DEAD who were in Hades. These dead given up by the sea were pre-adamic creatures who were seperated from their bodies. That is why demons being disobedient wander around in "waterless places" looking for a human body to infest - demon possession.

I submit that these being DIED in some previous age in some previous system headed up by Satan. The rememberance of that time is erased in the new heaven and the new earth not only by them being brought to judgment. But also by the fact that the sea, their holding place, will be no more -

"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away AND THE SEA WAS NO MORE." (Rev. 21:1)

Romans 5:12 must have some parameters on what the world means. These departed spirits are not angels and they probably DIED before Adam was created.