Originally posted by josephw
Again, I don't have a problem with an old earth.

But the life on it is young.

No, it's been around since early on. I gave a reference in my previous post for evidence of microbial mats 3.5 billion years ago. Cyanobacteria appeared no later than 2.5 billion years ago and photosynthesised oxygen, which caused the oxygen catastrophe and the evidence for this is in banded iron formations. This is a fairly recent review of the state of knowledge:
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/361/1470/903.full.pdf

Originally posted by DeepThought
No, it's been around since early on. I gave a reference in my previous post for evidence of microbial mats 3.5 billion years ago. Cyanobacteria appeared no later than 2.5 billion years ago and photosynthesised oxygen, which caused the oxygen catastrophe and the evidence for this is in banded iron formations. This is a fairly recent review of the state of knowledge:
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/361/1470/903.full.pdf

Compelling, but not as compelling as the Word of God.

When taken as a whole, i.e. the entire argument against creation, the vitriol hurled at believers by those who espouse evolution, and the state of the affairs of man, I choose to believe God. Not just in a God as creator, but I believe what God has spoken from His own mouth about how life began.

Am I to deny Jesus' resurrection too? I'd rather be burned alive than to disbelieve one word spoken by God.

Yes, I'm just a throwback afraid of science and I believe the earth is flat at the center of the universe! 🙄

But I will look closer at the link you provided. I doubt I will find the flaw, if there is one. If I do I'll start a thread to discuss it.

BTW Thanks for being civil, even if I wasn't.

😉

Originally posted by DeepThought
No, it's been around since early on. I gave a reference in my previous post for evidence of microbial mats 3.5 billion years ago. Cyanobacteria appeared no later than 2.5 billion years ago and photosynthesised oxygen, which caused the oxygen catastrophe and the evidence for this is in banded iron formations. This is a fairly recent review of the state of knowledge:
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/361/1470/903.full.pdf

"The pattern proposed for the oxygenation of the atmosphere and oceans is probably qualitatively correct, but its quantitative aspects should be regarded with a significant degree of scepticism."

I found the flaw. Heinrich D Holland spelled skepticism wrong. lol

No really, reading the paper was thrilling. It made me wish I had studied science for forty years, then I could conceivably understand more than .001% of it.

But to the point. The truth is, they found the needle in the haystack. Remarkable stuff, but whether it's true or not doesn't necessarily prove the time frame. All of the processes described could have occurred faster or slower than thought. Just my idea.

As is stated in the quote above, more skepticism was generated than convincing proof.

I'm not converted. 😉

Originally posted by FMF
I am asking you if you have any evidence that "hell" exists other than the claims according to the "biblical perspective" you happen to subscribe to?

You've been given a biblical perspective in reply to your question: Thread 157295. Having rejected it, you're on your own.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't see much of an answer in there at all. The best he comes up with is: 'Life is just built that way'. Hardly an answer. At no point does he explain the contradiction of a God of love sending people to hell, instead he is essentially saying: God sends people to hell, get used to it!
So, since Dr. Bruce W. Dunn can't seem to answer the question, can ...[text shortened]... go?
Start here: What is the purpose of punishment? (in human society, and in the case of hell)

"How can a God of love send anybody to Hell?" (OP)

Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't see much of an answer in there at all.

Why would the absence of "much of an answer" matter anyway, since you've repeatedly affirmed that there is no God?

Originally posted by divegeester
Of course what you and all the fire and brimstone preachers always seem to deliberately avoid discussing is the blatantly obvious differentiation between instant annihilation in a fire (or whatever other source) and burning in utter agony, not for a while but for all ETERNITY.

dive, please see my replies to your similar questions in the Vote Thread 160231 (Page 4)

Originally posted by josephw
Then just keep asking questions, and never getting any answers.

Yes, I have already realized that I won't be getting any answers from you on this subject.

You have no real reason to say that God doesn't exist or that God hasn't spoken to whom He will, and when and how.
Yes, actually, I do.

You merely reject what truth you hear simply because you just don't want to believe it, not because you know better.
I do know better. I am also better at determining what the truth actually is than you are. You simply believe anything you are told by the Bible regardless of whether it makes sense.

Originally posted by josephw
I am inclined to agree with you that the Christ rejecting will simply burn up and cease to exist because it is incomprehensible that one would exist forever in such a place as a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

But, Jesus said, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

"Their worm" is that which is left after total degeneration. I ...[text shortened]... nal life to anyone who asks. But wrath and death to those who reject God.

Just the way it is.

Comfortable in that cosy compromise now are you?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
There is no hell deep enough, it cannot burn long enough to pay for rejecting Jesus....

Read this back to yourself a few times and see if it starts to sound as psychotic to you as it does to me.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
dive, please see my replies to your similar questions in the Vote Thread 160231 (Page 4)

If all your replies are there then why start another thread on the subject?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Why would the absence of "much of an answer" matter anyway, since you've repeatedly affirmed that there is no God?

It doesn't really matter, but you asked for comments and I gave them.
Are you unwilling to answer my questions simply because you think it doesn't matter to me?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
You've been given a biblical perspective in reply to your question: Thread 157295. Having rejected it, you're on your own.

Thanks for your "biblical perspective". However, my question is about whether you have any evidence that "hell" exists other than your "biblical perspective".

Originally posted by DeepThought
I didn't cut and paste from anywhere. Those were my own words. Basically you get two measures of the age of the rock, so the measurements are more precise.

Evidence of microbial mats has been found in sandstone dated to around 3.5 billion years ago:
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/ast.2013.1030

But the sandstone can not be accurately dated. It is only a layer of mud that has dried and hardened. Nobody knows when this happened. We can only give an educated guess based on our worldview.

Originally posted by josephw
Again, I don't have a problem with an old earth.

But the life on it is young.

It is about 6,000 years OLD.

Originally posted by RJHinds
But the sandstone can not be accurately dated. It is only a layer of mud that has dried and hardened. Nobody knows when this happened. We can only give an educated guess based on our worldview.

Any so called guess is better than the fairy tale 6000 year old # you and your ilk put on the age of Earth. Science will forever be over your head since you don't WANT to learn anything not in the bible. The bible tales are total BS made up by people who knew nothing of what the world was made of, they thought it was all a matter of Earth Air Fire and Water. I imagine you do also.