@sonhouse saidI've seen you write about god, it is typically is a very small one that you complain about.
So you posit your god does things the most efficient way for things to happen. If that is the case why would your god have killed all land animals on Earth except those in the Ark just to kill some bad egg humans when you know good and well an efficient god would just go poof and bad humans are gone, no need to create a world wide catastrophe, So why would you say this god ...[text shortened]... us crowd just put man made aspects on your god and everyone has faith those man made specs are true.
@wildgrass saidDo I know why God does anything? No, outside of those times that explanations were given.
Do you know why God does anything? Its not like he's rushing to get to another meeting on time. What's a billion years to an immortal concept?
@kellyjay saidIf he wouldn't take a billion years to do something then why would he wait a week? What's a billion years to God? Nothing. The creation explanation in the Bible is a clear metaphor and the Pope along with most Christian faiths acknowledge this. It isn't an either/or thing as you describe it. THey're the same thing.
Do I know why God does anything? No, outside of those times that explanations were given.
@wildgrass saidBillion years is nothing to God, us a lot more. I don't care what the Pope thinks about any topic. I don't think it is a clear or a metaphor in any sense of the word.
If he wouldn't take a billion years to do something then why would he wait a week? What's a billion years to God? Nothing. The creation explanation in the Bible is a clear metaphor and the Pope along with most Christian faiths acknowledge this. It isn't an either/or thing as you describe it. THey're the same thing.
Do you have a counter story, theory, or whatever how everything came into being?
Personally I think a God who can speak the universe into being and maintain it all by the power of His Word, that knows every single thing from the beginning to the end is worth knowing, even more than this place He built for us.
@kellyjay saidAgain you are setting up the false dichotomy that you can know the place or the God who created it. But you can have both. Just because you are not a fan of abiogenesis as a concept does not mean you should disparage those who study it. Their work does nothing to threaten your faith. Why do you care so much? Science is not the enemy of God, it is a method to discover cool new things about the world around us.
Billion years is nothing to God, us a lot more. I don't care what the Pope thinks about any topic. I don't think it is a clear or a metaphor in any sense of the word.
Do you have a counter story, theory, or whatever how everything came into being?
Personally I think a God who can speak the universe into being and maintain it all by the power of His Word, that knows eve ...[text shortened]... gle thing from the beginning to the end is worth knowing, even more than this place He built for us.
@wildgrass saidWhen I talk about creation I don't call it fact, but faith, by faith it is something I trust yet cannot prove true. If true it must line up with the reality we live in, and when it is disparaged for reasons shared by everyone for that very thing I don't mind pointing that out. You, I, and everyone cannot prove what we believe is true about billions, millions, or thousands of years ago, and as I pointed out even events last night can be disputed.
Again you are setting up the false dichotomy that you can know the place or the God who created it. But you can have both. Just because you are not a fan of abiogenesis as a concept does not mean you should disparage those who study it. Their work does nothing to threaten your faith. Why do you care so much? Science is not the enemy of God, it is a method to discover cool new things about the world around us.
When we look at the evidence it is the evidence that matters, we all bring to the table things we already believe. So when that becomes a reason to ignore something because of bias, it is bias that causes a rejection or acceptance, that removes what really matters, the facts of the matter, if we are going to rest on the facts, than it should be facts of that matter, that matter!
@KellyJay
You know full well there are no 'facts' in the creation myth. You take it on faith and ignore any science showing otherwise, like the age of Earth not being a few thousand years old, you should take a look at the Grand Canyon for instance, it is 50 MILLION years old and you can see what water does when a river flows for millions of years, the Grand Canyon did not start out as a canyon, it was slowly carved that way but the bigger news about that canyon is the miles deep marine fossil deposits UNDER the GC. You can say the GC formed with the world wide flood but that will not explain the miles deep marine deposits UNDER that canyon which would never have been touched by any flood, world wide or not.
That is evidence right under your feet which you have to rationalize somehow, perhaps saying god put all those dead animals under the GC just to fool only those who are scientifically advanced enough to have figured that bit out.
If we had never developed science we would never have known about those deposits so why would a god do that? That is a lot of trouble to go to just to fool humans. It is highly unlikely a god would be so devious to humans it felt the need to do that sort of thing.
Much more likely the creation myth is just that, a myth and a repaved much earlier 7 day creation from Egypt at that.
@sonhouse saidIt is weird though, right? Dinosaurs (billions and billions of them) were around for 180 MILLION years and only left behind a few rib cages and footprints.
@KellyJay
You know full well there are no 'facts' in the creation myth. You take it on faith and ignore any science showing otherwise, like the age of Earth not being a few thousand years old, you should take a look at the Grand Canyon for instance, it is 50 MILLION years old and you can see what water does when a river flows for millions of years, the Grand Canyon did not ...[text shortened]... the creation myth is just that, a myth and a repaved much earlier 7 day creation from Egypt at that.
We've only been on earth for a tiny fraction of that. In terms of recorded human history it's 1/36,000th of that time. A hundred million years after we're gone, this current geological time will (maybe) be marked by a few centimeters of muck on the ocean floor and a lot of extinction events.
@sonhouse saidYou realize don't you that you are simply stating your beliefs as facts therefore any who disagree with you are wrong? It is as if you know what is 50 million years old and so on, there is no dispute, you cannot be wrong. You know how the GC started out, you know how it was formed, you cannot be wrong. Just as you know the creation story is also not true because you say so. Stating what you believe doesn't make it true, it is only expressing an opinion.
@KellyJay
You know full well there are no 'facts' in the creation myth. You take it on faith and ignore any science showing otherwise, like the age of Earth not being a few thousand years old, you should take a look at the Grand Canyon for instance, it is 50 MILLION years old and you can see what water does when a river flows for millions of years, the Grand Canyon did not ...[text shortened]... the creation myth is just that, a myth and a repaved much earlier 7 day creation from Egypt at that.
@wildgrass saidWell yea, you know what was going on millions of years ago and these are facts to you.
It is weird though, right? Dinosaurs (billions and billions of them) were around for 180 MILLION years and only left behind a few rib cages and footprints.
We've only been on earth for a tiny fraction of that. In terms of recorded human history it's 1/36,000th of that time. A hundred million years after we're gone, this current geological time will (maybe) be marked by a few centimeters of muck on the ocean floor and a lot of extinction events.
@KellyJay
And you ignore what is UNDERNEATH the GC, MILES of oceanic fossil deposits. You don't get that in 50 million years. More like hundreds of millions of years of ocean life living and dying and settling then continents moving raising up the former ocean bottom and then drying out there and THEN dust and such build up AFTER all that was said and done THEN the GC formed for the river that ate away to the canyon we see today.
I used to battle with Hinds over the young Earth deal pointing to the GC and he just said it was the result of the world wide flood but had no answer to the fact there are miles of ocean deposits UNDER the GC.
If you use last thursdayism to explain it, how do you explain WHY such a god would want to muddy things up hiding the 6000 year old Earth with incredibly old stuff, like buried dino bones by the millions or Neandertals and Denosivans and such, extinct today, facts we as humans didn't even suss out till the 19th century so what was the rational for all that last thursdayism?
@sonhouse saidAgain, you say 50 million years as if it is a undisputable reality, that cannot be wrong. That is a lot of faith you have there! I can honestly say you may be right, I don't know, but what I do know, you don't know either.
@KellyJay
And you ignore what is UNDERNEATH the GC, MILES of oceanic fossil deposits. You don't get that in 50 million years. More like hundreds of millions of years of ocean life living and dying and settling then continents moving raising up the former ocean bottom and then drying out there and THEN dust and such build up AFTER all that was said and done THEN the GC forme ...[text shortened]... s didn't even suss out till the 19th century so what was the rational for all that last thursdayism?
@KellyJay
Jebesus, all you have to do is look at that dam thing! We have photos from over a hundred years ago and we see how many inches the canyon gets scrapped out in that time and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the same slow process has been going on for a LONG time. Just run the scenario in reverse, what is the problem with that? You think rock was softer a million years ago?
You said it yourself, you know the laws of physics don't change from time to time, water erodes at the same rate a million years ago as it does today, zero change in that, the rocks are about the same at depth 10 feet deep and 1000 feet deep so why would you have doubts as to the age of the GC? That is to say how long it took that river to carve that stuff?
@sonhouse saidYou assume much!
@KellyJay
Jebesus, all you have to do is look at that dam thing! We have photos from over a hundred years ago and we see how many inches the canyon gets scrapped out in that time and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the same slow process has been going on for a LONG time. Just run the scenario in reverse, what is the problem with that? You think rock was softe ...[text shortened]... have doubts as to the age of the GC? That is to say how long it took that river to carve that stuff?
@KellyJay
And you deliberately don't want to know since that would punch holes in your faith.
Exactly what do you think I am assuming? Are rocks as hard now as they were a million years ago? You think that is just an assumption? Do you think the laws of physics are the same as they were a million years ago?
Do you think water is somehow different a million years ago?
These are kind of fundamental aspects of science, that water IS the same as it was a million years ago and will be the same a million years from now and the same with the rocks of the GC and the laws of physics.
You just don't want to take the small leap of logic to conclude the GC actually IS millions of years ago except millions of years ago the canyon was not as deep because of the erosion of the rocks by the rushing water.
Did you forget we have photo's of the GC from over 100 years ago showing only a tiny amount of change.
That is solid evidence not guesswork.
And because of that we can with some confidence run the clock backwards to figure out roughly how long ago the GC was at the beginning of it's cutting.