Originally posted by RJHindsIt was the orthodoxed Christians you refer to who ruthlessly and manipulatively controlled and developed Christianity for centuries, and they used Paul's words. And then a millenia later when the Protestants broke off and formed, they despised science just as much.
It is really the Pope and his cohorts that you are referring to. They were
like the Pharisees that Christ condemned.
Originally posted by moon1969And still do.
It was the orthodoxed Christians you refer to who ruthlessly and manipulatively controlled and developed Christianity for centuries, and they used Paul's words. And then a millenia later when the Protestants broke off and formed, they depised science just as much.
BTW, I just noticed your handle, moon69. Were you involved? I was at Goddard Space Flight center att, Apollo Tracking and Timing. Sigh.
Originally posted by sonhouseNo, I was only 6 years old in 1969. Though, I have lived in Houston including near Johnson Space Center for years, and knew people who worked contract for NASA, and saw the federal dollars flowing in. My handle was a common user id I use because it is easy to remember. I didn't realize it would be my profile name.
And still do.
BTW, I just noticed your handle, moon69. Were you involved? I was at Goddard Space Flight center att, Apollo Tracking and Timing. Sigh.
Wow I didn't even realize that there was a flight center in Maryland. That must have been fascinating to be involved.
Originally posted by KellyJayI have asked you many times, and you refuse to answer - could you be wrong about World War I. You refuse to answer because you know that you could not be wrong, and that I am completely justified in saying I could not be wrong that the earth is billions of years old.
I'd say the biggest assumption you are making is that you cannot be wrong
about dating. With that you are completely relying on all the things you
have assumed are true about the now as it translates back in time.
Kelly
It is not an assumption, it is based on logic and evidence.
Originally posted by KellyJayYou need to 'stand corrected' whether I tell you that or not. You are being illogical. You are saying that everything I say is related to dating the universe and that I cannot date the universe therefore everything I say must be wrong. Sorry but it doesn't work that way.
You cannot be right about dating the universe without such knowledge.
Now if you want to to tell me that with star light you cannot tell me about
dates that you could be wrong....I'll stand corrected.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayNo, I haven't. If there is a photo on my wall showing me as a child, did I create the photo? Did I create the appearance that I was once a child? No. The 'fake history' exists. I look up at the stars and I see stars. Either the universe is very old, or the stars are fake. I did not create the stars. If they are fake, I did not create them.
Oh but you are running the risk of that of doing that yourself, you believe its
billions of years old do you not? If it is only a few thousand years old you've
created a fake history.
Originally posted by KellyJayI'm not saying all science is bad/good science but you can't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Personally I think global warming is scientific farce of today, you could make
the claim that if it isn't true, then we have a modern day flat earth society
doing well among us today.
Kelly
Manny
Ok let's say for argument sake that God created the universe 10K years ago we could or would see the results/consequences of this in the heavens right now there would be evidence physically that we could see. We know that the universe is larger that 10K light years this is were the problem arises at least for those who want truth.
Manny
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/ageofuniverse.html
Copied and pasted
interesting
Geometric measurements of quasar 3C 279 now establish that the universe is at least 5.9 billion light years across. Since light cannot travel faster than the speed of light, the light from that quasar must have been traveling for 5.9 billion years. The alternative young earth explanation is that God created the light in transit. However, we know that quasars existed only during the beginning of the universe, since none are seen closer to us than billions of light years. If God created light in transit, He would have created the light in transit from a quasar that does not now exist. Likewise, we have observed supernova explosions in galaxies millions of light years away. If God created light in transit from these objects, He would have made the light from an object that does not now exist, since it appeared to have blown up millions of years before the universe was actually created. How can the universe declare the glory and righteousness of God if it declares a lie? Like many young earth doctrines, the appearance of age argument is nowhere taught in the Bible.
Manny
Appearance of age claims that God created a world with a false history. Such a claim is directly refuted by the Bible, which claims that God's creation declares His glory and righteousness. Nowhere does any biblical author make the claim that God's word contradicts any historical facts. Ultimately, the claim that the God of creation would lie to us with a false history of the universe, is a direct attack on the righteous character of God and cannot be tolerated within the Church! The God who would deceive His creatures with lies is not the God of the Bible. A Christian friend first presented this deceiver God to me as a senior in high school. Assuming he was correct, I rejected the "God of the Bible" as being unworthy of my worship. It wasn't until many years later that I read the Bible for myself and came to faith in Jesus Christ - the God who is the truth31 - my Creator. Why are those who advocate a deceiver God surprised when unbelievers reject their unrighteous God?
Copied and pasted from: http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/appearance.html
Manny
Originally posted by twhiteheadWW1 is a large topic, what do you think I could be wrong about?
I have asked you many times, and you refuse to answer - could you be wrong about World War I. You refuse to answer because you know that you could not be wrong, and that I am completely justified in saying I could not be wrong that the earth is billions of years old.
It is not an assumption, it is based on logic and evidence.
Kelly