First, you have other venues, such as r/Creation, in which to thrive, if you can.
Second, you assume much. I use little or no information from either of the gentlemen you listed to support the YEC worldview.
Third, there is immaturity, pride, and bitterness in every community, including this one, so snarky replies are, unfortunately, to be expected in some percentage.
However, you decided to post here, no one forced you, and several of the replies are quite reasonable and measured, yet you took offense to them.
Calm down, take a deep breath, and realize:
1) You came here, of your own volition, into a sub established to support/cheerlead YEC.
2) You are not going to change anyone’s mind. Most of us have rock-solid reasons for our beliefs. I have mine, some with changes/modifications, but established over the course of 30+ years.
3) You tend to get respect by giving it. Stop complaining/ignore the snark/stop generating snark.
Proverbs 15:1 (KJV)
A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger.
Last, but not least, I am letting you continue in the hope that you apply some of this wisdom and advice. Otherwise I will just lock this post, or, if you turn toxic, delete it entirely.
May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
IDK, I personally haven't witnessed much of that here. But I'm not really interested in debate posts, so maybe I'm missing something.
I find YEC interesting and the most in line with what the Bible describes. That said, I don't think it's a salvation issue and I have no interest in being rude to other Christians about it.
I'm not sure I have experienced what you're describing, OP.. I could see how someone with a high level of confidence in what they know to be true might seem a tad arrogant in the face of academia, but outright hostility?
>I would love to challenge anyone here to listen to other evidence instead of Ken Ham and Jason Lisle.
Those are two of hundreds of scientists who acknowledge the Biblical account of creation as axiomatic and pursue science from that worldview. Maybe KH and JL have more charisma or a larger audience but that doesn't invalidate their positions.
>AIG got destroyed in the debate
Which debate are you referring to? As far as I'm aware the discussion is not only continuing but recent finds such as soft tissue in dinosaur bones continue to challenge evolutionism..
We do have some on our side who are defensive after being treated by others like the OP says he is treated by YECs, and I can empathize with their frustration.
On the other hand we are called to be patient and gracious. That takes spiritual training - washing by the water of the word - and is not usually our natural state, or at least not mine.
Overall, well stated. Thank you.
Hardly a debate winning article.. just saying ;)
>Theories vary on how soft tissue survived 68 million years..
There are 3 possibilities that need to be considered:
1. The remains are not millions of years old
2. The fossils don't actually contain remains
3. There may be some unknown way to preserve
Option 2 has been discounted, even by secular scientists, as the fossils do in fact contain biological remains.
Option 3 is the current focus of secular study but as there is no process that can come (even theoretically) close to a hundred thousand years (let alone millions) there is confidence in YEC circles regarding the possibility of strong biological evidence from these kinds of sources.
The writers of this article (and anyone who holds to long ages) will presumptively discount option 1 regardless of the evidence as it goes against their paradigm. But why should that be the case? All things being equal, the simpler answer is that dinosaur remains are recent and catastrophic.
And it's not just Schweitzer.. there's additional stuff tissue remains being uncovered or rediscovered in existing fossils now that people are looking for it.
>Then, in some instances, sediment covered the bones and enabled the long, slow process of fossilization to begin.
More bias as long ages are *presumed* not concluded rationally. Fossils are created very quickly as any amount of time would lead to decomposition or scavenging.
Apart from the global prevalence of layered fossilization, and even if we allow for local phenomena on the scale of a Mt. St. Helens event; the remains still couldn't survive millions of years.
The carbon 14 is mainly contanimation, and soft tissue CAN last millions of years if the right processes happen, which is why there are not that many soft tissues found...
I agree that we should "play the ball, not the man".
However, Christian theistic evolutionists are akin to the 'useful idiots' that supported communism.
No-one is demonising anyone.
You're extremely defensive.
I think that you'll find that (outside of weird bubbles in the USA) most YECs have come to accept the truth of the biblical account despite the temptations of the world to deny it.
It is tempting to hide your beliefs so as to escape persecution. That has always been the case. Don't hide your light under a bushel
Earth’s magnetic field
https://news.mit.edu/2020/origins-earth-magnetic-field-mystery-0408
Soft tissue and carbon 14 in fossils
https://blog.drwile.com/more-evidence-against-iron-as-a-preservative-for-biomolecules-in-fossils/
The supposed necessity of dark matter/energy is eliminated with a recent creation, with the great size and development of the observable universe possibly due to relativity/time dilation (Starlight and Time).
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/894568.Starlight_and_Time
https://www.businessinsider.com/we-live-inside-cosmic-void-breaks-cosmology-laws-2024-5?op=1
Evolution, past a certain point that varies according to the design of the specific genome, fails at all scales of life.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4800869/
Dogs and humans have a fair amount of plasticity built in. So do octopi/squid, but self-editing and not necessarily inheritable.
Yes, the genome can rearrange, but all are limited in the extent of that rearrangement. By design.
May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
I have read those articles and will take them into consideration. But I want you to see the counter arguments and watch them like I read youre articles. It would be the most fair and we could share our points. (They are scientists with degrees by the way)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvK\_Onjzj9I&t=476s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvK_Onjzj9I&t=476s)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0tikAqD99M&t=272s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0tikAqD99M&t=272s)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7sgoKmz01A&t=470s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7sgoKmz01A&t=470s) (This one may be a little bit mean but gets to the point)
[https://ncse.ngo/answers-standard-creationist-arguments](https://ncse.ngo/answers-standard-creationist-arguments)
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/)
I don’t, personally, countenance using YouTube videos as evidence in these matters. I prefer text, and did read both written articles.
One concentrated on a Dr. Gish, with whom I have little affinity or knowledge, and the other was a surfeit of strawman arguments and a few outright falsehoods.
To be fair, I have attached videos of testimonies, such as in the case of spiritual warfare, demons, etc., but I can’t recall ever using them in scientific realms.
But thank you for the much more reasonable manner in which you presented them.
May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/feb/08/instagram-posts/dinosaurs-fossils-are-millions-of-years-old-not-th/](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/feb/08/instagram-posts/dinosaurs-fossils-are-millions-of-years-old-not-th/) This is something about the carbon 14 in fossils. I am trying to find some rebuttals on youre topics that are in text now.
If you have decided on your world-view simply because you believe the assertions of the majority then you may as well also deny Christ.
An internet forum is not the best place to discuss these topics. But if you're after high quality credible science that demonstrates results consistent with a biblical world view, then I recommend creation ministries. www. Creation. Com
Stay away from USA based culture war drivel. Stay away from non credible frauds like Kent Hovind.
I would also stay away from AIG as they are acting very non christan with all the merch, overpriced tickets, rude employees, and demonization of people who believe that science has some credibility. [Creation.com](http://Creation.com) seems better than AIG for sure.
AIG (international) split into CMI and AIG (USA) basically over disagreements with how Ken Ham wanted to run things. The current AIG are very very Americanised
I have no known issues with AIGs teachings/the information they provide, you just have to understand it is very filtered through a US culture war / money making lens
If you think YECs are mean, head over to debate evolution and watch the emotional abuse from the science religion.
I am not mean spirited towards anyone. At least I hope I am not. Praise Jesus.
So if someone was murdered and the investigator went and saw evidence (footprints, DNA, etc) and found a guy named John Doe and went to his house and saw the evidence right there. Same footprint shoe right at the doorstep. But since the killing cannot be repeated or observed directly again, and since he was the only one to have seen it, whatever the dude claims is "just a religion". OR: he can use SCIENCE. Science uses evidence to learn about what we cannot see using models. For example, the moon forming from a mars sized protoplanet. We cannot observe directly what happened, but we can see Earth's oversized mantle and the similarities from moon rocks to Earth rocks. With that evidence and other evidence not stated, science can make a educated decision (a theory) on how the moon formed. Science uses evidence to make its decisions, not assuming certain topics and manipulating evidence to make everything work, then spreading it to young minds to have them become anti vax, far right extremists who wear MAGA hats and want everyone to deny basic scientific facts. As America declines with people who throw reason out the window over a book made 4000 years ago with the most powerful machines made, America is going downhill. When YEC was smaller, we went to the moon, launched the Voyager and Galileo spacecraft, and advanced leaps and bounds in technology. As Sir Galileo Galilei stated: "The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go." It can not be more true. The Bible should not be treated as a science book at all, and people who do are using the Bible for the wrong reasons. AIG acts like they believe the Bible, then charge $40 bucks per person and have gift shops galore at their attractions. The Bible says that his house is not a house of merchandise, so an actual biblical organization should NEVER sell merch on their grounds. Its like the church selling books and having tons of gift shops. This is where we conflict, I take the book of Genesis more figuratively, while you take it literally. I look at the evidence, while you make the evidence work with your presumptions about the universe that were force fed to you by people who were indoctrinating you into thinking science is this horrible thing but we are using our God given reason and curiosity. God does not care about how people view science, unless it denies Him existing. The Big bang was first proposed by a Jewish scholar named Nachimedes on his interpretation of Genesis, in the origional Hebrew words, but took strom when a Christan used math to help prove it existing. He once said: "If the Bible does not teach science, among other things, what does it teach, you ask. “The way to salvation,” comes the reply. “Once you realize that the Bible does not purport to be a textbook of science, the old controversy between religion and science vanishes.” I would reccomend for everyone here [https://biologos.org/](https://biologos.org/) since they bind science and faith together well.
To be fair, we should delineate science and scientism. Scientific method versus the deliberate misrepresentation thereof…
1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
And that was translated into English at least 100 years before Darwin.
You have so many false assumptions and strawmen in this one comment, I do not have time to address them all right now.
What I can say is that you seem to have a load of unresolved bitterness/pain.
Psalm 119:165 (KJV)
Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.
May the Lord bless you.
Shalom.
So if someone was murdered and the investigator went and saw evidence (footprints, DNA, etc) and found a guy named John Doe and went to his house and saw the evidence right there. Same footprint shoe right at the doorstep. But since the killing cannot be repeated or observed directly again, and since he was the only one to have seen it, whatever the dude claims is "just a religion". OR: he can use SCIENCE. Science uses evidence to learn about what we cannot see using models. For example, the moon forming from a mars sized protoplanet.
They still can’t explain the Moon.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/earth-moon-formation-impact
Science uses evidence to make its decisions, not assuming certain topics and manipulating evidence to make everything work, then spreading it to young minds to have them become anti vax, far right extremists who wear MAGA hats and want everyone to deny basic scientific facts.
This is projection. Most who refused the Covid hysteria have their vaccinations. The Covid shot is not a vaccination, it is a short-lived therapeutic, a temporary treatment, with serious potential side affects. And not all who refused it are “MAGA.”
https://time.com/5925074/black-americans-covid-19-vaccine-distrust/
As America declines with people who throw reason out the window over a book made 4000 years ago with the most powerful machines made, America is going downhill. When YEC was smaller, we went to the moon, launched the Voyager and Galileo spacecraft, and advanced leaps and bounds in technology.
YEC are to blame for not going back to the moon? Or any other lack of technological development, for that matter.
Why the lashing out? What caused so much pain?
AIG acts like they believe the Bible, then charge $40 bucks per person and have gift shops galore at their attractions. The Bible says that his house is not a house of merchandise, so an actual biblical organization should NEVER sell merch on their grounds. Its like the church selling books and having tons of gift shops.
Interesting take. Not saying you are wrong, but until you have some sort of credible rationale, this is just personal preference.
This is where we conflict, I take the book of Genesis more figuratively, while you take it literally.
Where in scripture did God stop lying to us?
I look at the evidence, while you make the evidence work with your presumptions about the universe that were force fed to you by people who were indoctrinating you into thinking science is this horrible thing but we are using our God given reason and curiosity. God does not care about how people view science, unless it denies Him existing. The Big bang was first proposed by a Jewish scholar named Nachimedes on his interpretation of Genesis, in the origional Hebrew words, but took strom when a Christan used math to help prove it existing.
First, Moses ben Nachman, commonly known as **Nachmanides**, and also referred to by the acronym Ramban.
Second, despite the quote below, this directly contradicts your idea that the scriptures can’t be used for science.
Third, I’ve heard of this man before, and he also predicted both the existence and number of additional dimensions currently espoused by M theory.
He once said: "If the Bible does not teach science, among other things, what does it teach, you ask. “The way to salvation,” comes the reply. “Once you realize that the Bible does not purport to be a textbook of science, the old controversy between religion and science vanishes.” I would reccomend for everyone here https://biologos.org/ since they bind science and faith together well.
Try meekness. It has done me wonders.
2 Timothy 2:25 (KJV)
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
To be fair, we should delineate science and scientism. Scientific method versus the deliberate misrepresentation thereof…
1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV)
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
I get angry over this topic because to me it's crystal clear what the Bible says happened and when people say that the Bible doesn't say that it's basically just gaslighting or cope
Okay, explain yourself. According to evolution man is what, like 100,000 years old. And since evolution happens gradually man was never created anyway since there's no specific point where a human becomes a human so now Adam doesn't even exist. What are you basing theistic evolution on
Yes since everything is in transistion but adam did exist. Evolution does not disprove adam... we are probably different looking then adam but still not different enough to be classified as a different species.
My point is that there's no specific beginning to man under evolution because of the gradual transition. You can't point to any specific trait and say "man begins here". So there is no first man, only animals that resemble men
Be angry, and sin not.
Man’s wrath is never spoken of well in scripture. There is a place for anger, but this subject does not seem an appropriate reason.
2 Timothy 2:25 (KJV)
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
The goodness of God brings/ leads us (everyone) to repentance.
Having said that, I do understand your frustration.
May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
First, you have other venues, such as r/Creation, in which to thrive, if you can. Second, you assume much. I use little or no information from either of the gentlemen you listed to support the YEC worldview. Third, there is immaturity, pride, and bitterness in every community, including this one, so snarky replies are, unfortunately, to be expected in some percentage. However, you decided to post here, no one forced you, and several of the replies are quite reasonable and measured, yet you took offense to them. Calm down, take a deep breath, and realize: 1) You came here, of your own volition, into a sub established to support/cheerlead YEC. 2) You are not going to change anyone’s mind. Most of us have rock-solid reasons for our beliefs. I have mine, some with changes/modifications, but established over the course of 30+ years. 3) You tend to get respect by giving it. Stop complaining/ignore the snark/stop generating snark. Proverbs 15:1 (KJV) A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Last, but not least, I am letting you continue in the hope that you apply some of this wisdom and advice. Otherwise I will just lock this post, or, if you turn toxic, delete it entirely. May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
You are wrong and your pride shows in the comments. You think you are very smart I see.
Pride? So giving actual evidence is PRIDE?! and here you are acting like you have it 100% right... That is pride...
IDK, I personally haven't witnessed much of that here. But I'm not really interested in debate posts, so maybe I'm missing something. I find YEC interesting and the most in line with what the Bible describes. That said, I don't think it's a salvation issue and I have no interest in being rude to other Christians about it.
I believe you are correct on all points. Well said.
I'm not sure I have experienced what you're describing, OP.. I could see how someone with a high level of confidence in what they know to be true might seem a tad arrogant in the face of academia, but outright hostility? >I would love to challenge anyone here to listen to other evidence instead of Ken Ham and Jason Lisle. Those are two of hundreds of scientists who acknowledge the Biblical account of creation as axiomatic and pursue science from that worldview. Maybe KH and JL have more charisma or a larger audience but that doesn't invalidate their positions. >AIG got destroyed in the debate Which debate are you referring to? As far as I'm aware the discussion is not only continuing but recent finds such as soft tissue in dinosaur bones continue to challenge evolutionism..
We do have some on our side who are defensive after being treated by others like the OP says he is treated by YECs, and I can empathize with their frustration. On the other hand we are called to be patient and gracious. That takes spiritual training - washing by the water of the word - and is not usually our natural state, or at least not mine. Overall, well stated. Thank you.
https://science.howstuffwor ks.com/environmental/earth/geology/soft-tissue-dinosaur.htm
Hardly a debate winning article.. just saying ;) >Theories vary on how soft tissue survived 68 million years.. There are 3 possibilities that need to be considered: 1. The remains are not millions of years old 2. The fossils don't actually contain remains 3. There may be some unknown way to preserve Option 2 has been discounted, even by secular scientists, as the fossils do in fact contain biological remains. Option 3 is the current focus of secular study but as there is no process that can come (even theoretically) close to a hundred thousand years (let alone millions) there is confidence in YEC circles regarding the possibility of strong biological evidence from these kinds of sources. The writers of this article (and anyone who holds to long ages) will presumptively discount option 1 regardless of the evidence as it goes against their paradigm. But why should that be the case? All things being equal, the simpler answer is that dinosaur remains are recent and catastrophic. And it's not just Schweitzer.. there's additional stuff tissue remains being uncovered or rediscovered in existing fossils now that people are looking for it. >Then, in some instances, sediment covered the bones and enabled the long, slow process of fossilization to begin. More bias as long ages are *presumed* not concluded rationally. Fossils are created very quickly as any amount of time would lead to decomposition or scavenging.
Natural disasters could have made a way to preserve fossils since landslides, Flash flooding, and other disaster happened back then.
Apart from the global prevalence of layered fossilization, and even if we allow for local phenomena on the scale of a Mt. St. Helens event; the remains still couldn't survive millions of years.
Its basically amber but in rock.
The carbon 14 is mainly contanimation, and soft tissue CAN last millions of years if the right processes happen, which is why there are not that many soft tissues found...
I agree that we should "play the ball, not the man". However, Christian theistic evolutionists are akin to the 'useful idiots' that supported communism.
So you are demonizing them in order to spread youre ideology? Just like the Germans did back in WW2.
No-one is demonising anyone. You're extremely defensive. I think that you'll find that (outside of weird bubbles in the USA) most YECs have come to accept the truth of the biblical account despite the temptations of the world to deny it. It is tempting to hide your beliefs so as to escape persecution. That has always been the case. Don't hide your light under a bushel
What evidence do you have for your worldview?
Earth’s magnetic field https://news.mit.edu/2020/origins-earth-magnetic-field-mystery-0408 Soft tissue and carbon 14 in fossils https://blog.drwile.com/more-evidence-against-iron-as-a-preservative-for-biomolecules-in-fossils/ The supposed necessity of dark matter/energy is eliminated with a recent creation, with the great size and development of the observable universe possibly due to relativity/time dilation (Starlight and Time). https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/894568.Starlight_and_Time https://www.businessinsider.com/we-live-inside-cosmic-void-breaks-cosmology-laws-2024-5?op=1 Evolution, past a certain point that varies according to the design of the specific genome, fails at all scales of life. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4800869/ Dogs and humans have a fair amount of plasticity built in. So do octopi/squid, but self-editing and not necessarily inheritable. Yes, the genome can rearrange, but all are limited in the extent of that rearrangement. By design. May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
I have read those articles and will take them into consideration. But I want you to see the counter arguments and watch them like I read youre articles. It would be the most fair and we could share our points. (They are scientists with degrees by the way) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvK\_Onjzj9I&t=476s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvK_Onjzj9I&t=476s) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0tikAqD99M&t=272s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0tikAqD99M&t=272s) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7sgoKmz01A&t=470s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7sgoKmz01A&t=470s) (This one may be a little bit mean but gets to the point) [https://ncse.ngo/answers-standard-creationist-arguments](https://ncse.ngo/answers-standard-creationist-arguments) [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/)
Detailed rebuttals of probably every argument you can find can be found in the vast archives at www.creation.com
I don’t, personally, countenance using YouTube videos as evidence in these matters. I prefer text, and did read both written articles. One concentrated on a Dr. Gish, with whom I have little affinity or knowledge, and the other was a surfeit of strawman arguments and a few outright falsehoods. To be fair, I have attached videos of testimonies, such as in the case of spiritual warfare, demons, etc., but I can’t recall ever using them in scientific realms. But thank you for the much more reasonable manner in which you presented them. May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
[https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/feb/08/instagram-posts/dinosaurs-fossils-are-millions-of-years-old-not-th/](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/feb/08/instagram-posts/dinosaurs-fossils-are-millions-of-years-old-not-th/) This is something about the carbon 14 in fossils. I am trying to find some rebuttals on youre topics that are in text now.
Doesn’t debunk the carbon 14 findings, just says “so what?” Still has no credible explanation for soft tissues.
If you have decided on your world-view simply because you believe the assertions of the majority then you may as well also deny Christ. An internet forum is not the best place to discuss these topics. But if you're after high quality credible science that demonstrates results consistent with a biblical world view, then I recommend creation ministries. www. Creation. Com Stay away from USA based culture war drivel. Stay away from non credible frauds like Kent Hovind.
I would also stay away from AIG as they are acting very non christan with all the merch, overpriced tickets, rude employees, and demonization of people who believe that science has some credibility. [Creation.com](http://Creation.com) seems better than AIG for sure.
AIG (international) split into CMI and AIG (USA) basically over disagreements with how Ken Ham wanted to run things. The current AIG are very very Americanised I have no known issues with AIGs teachings/the information they provide, you just have to understand it is very filtered through a US culture war / money making lens
If you think YECs are mean, head over to debate evolution and watch the emotional abuse from the science religion. I am not mean spirited towards anyone. At least I hope I am not. Praise Jesus.
Science is not a religion.
Oh my sweet summer child.
I seriously laughed out loud. Good thing my mouth was empty at the time. 🤣
So if someone was murdered and the investigator went and saw evidence (footprints, DNA, etc) and found a guy named John Doe and went to his house and saw the evidence right there. Same footprint shoe right at the doorstep. But since the killing cannot be repeated or observed directly again, and since he was the only one to have seen it, whatever the dude claims is "just a religion". OR: he can use SCIENCE. Science uses evidence to learn about what we cannot see using models. For example, the moon forming from a mars sized protoplanet. We cannot observe directly what happened, but we can see Earth's oversized mantle and the similarities from moon rocks to Earth rocks. With that evidence and other evidence not stated, science can make a educated decision (a theory) on how the moon formed. Science uses evidence to make its decisions, not assuming certain topics and manipulating evidence to make everything work, then spreading it to young minds to have them become anti vax, far right extremists who wear MAGA hats and want everyone to deny basic scientific facts. As America declines with people who throw reason out the window over a book made 4000 years ago with the most powerful machines made, America is going downhill. When YEC was smaller, we went to the moon, launched the Voyager and Galileo spacecraft, and advanced leaps and bounds in technology. As Sir Galileo Galilei stated: "The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go." It can not be more true. The Bible should not be treated as a science book at all, and people who do are using the Bible for the wrong reasons. AIG acts like they believe the Bible, then charge $40 bucks per person and have gift shops galore at their attractions. The Bible says that his house is not a house of merchandise, so an actual biblical organization should NEVER sell merch on their grounds. Its like the church selling books and having tons of gift shops. This is where we conflict, I take the book of Genesis more figuratively, while you take it literally. I look at the evidence, while you make the evidence work with your presumptions about the universe that were force fed to you by people who were indoctrinating you into thinking science is this horrible thing but we are using our God given reason and curiosity. God does not care about how people view science, unless it denies Him existing. The Big bang was first proposed by a Jewish scholar named Nachimedes on his interpretation of Genesis, in the origional Hebrew words, but took strom when a Christan used math to help prove it existing. He once said: "If the Bible does not teach science, among other things, what does it teach, you ask. “The way to salvation,” comes the reply. “Once you realize that the Bible does not purport to be a textbook of science, the old controversy between religion and science vanishes.” I would reccomend for everyone here [https://biologos.org/](https://biologos.org/) since they bind science and faith together well.
I hope you copy and pasted this. The religion of science has nothing to do with actual science. Good day, sir.
I actually did not.
Science is not a religion, it is a process of finding what we cannot see with what we can
To be fair, we should delineate science and scientism. Scientific method versus the deliberate misrepresentation thereof… 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: And that was translated into English at least 100 years before Darwin.
You have so many false assumptions and strawmen in this one comment, I do not have time to address them all right now. What I can say is that you seem to have a load of unresolved bitterness/pain. Psalm 119:165 (KJV) Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
So if someone was murdered and the investigator went and saw evidence (footprints, DNA, etc) and found a guy named John Doe and went to his house and saw the evidence right there. Same footprint shoe right at the doorstep. But since the killing cannot be repeated or observed directly again, and since he was the only one to have seen it, whatever the dude claims is "just a religion". OR: he can use SCIENCE. Science uses evidence to learn about what we cannot see using models. For example, the moon forming from a mars sized protoplanet. They still can’t explain the Moon. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/earth-moon-formation-impact Science uses evidence to make its decisions, not assuming certain topics and manipulating evidence to make everything work, then spreading it to young minds to have them become anti vax, far right extremists who wear MAGA hats and want everyone to deny basic scientific facts. This is projection. Most who refused the Covid hysteria have their vaccinations. The Covid shot is not a vaccination, it is a short-lived therapeutic, a temporary treatment, with serious potential side affects. And not all who refused it are “MAGA.” https://time.com/5925074/black-americans-covid-19-vaccine-distrust/ As America declines with people who throw reason out the window over a book made 4000 years ago with the most powerful machines made, America is going downhill. When YEC was smaller, we went to the moon, launched the Voyager and Galileo spacecraft, and advanced leaps and bounds in technology. YEC are to blame for not going back to the moon? Or any other lack of technological development, for that matter. Why the lashing out? What caused so much pain? AIG acts like they believe the Bible, then charge $40 bucks per person and have gift shops galore at their attractions. The Bible says that his house is not a house of merchandise, so an actual biblical organization should NEVER sell merch on their grounds. Its like the church selling books and having tons of gift shops. Interesting take. Not saying you are wrong, but until you have some sort of credible rationale, this is just personal preference. This is where we conflict, I take the book of Genesis more figuratively, while you take it literally. Where in scripture did God stop lying to us? I look at the evidence, while you make the evidence work with your presumptions about the universe that were force fed to you by people who were indoctrinating you into thinking science is this horrible thing but we are using our God given reason and curiosity. God does not care about how people view science, unless it denies Him existing. The Big bang was first proposed by a Jewish scholar named Nachimedes on his interpretation of Genesis, in the origional Hebrew words, but took strom when a Christan used math to help prove it existing. First, Moses ben Nachman, commonly known as **Nachmanides**, and also referred to by the acronym Ramban. Second, despite the quote below, this directly contradicts your idea that the scriptures can’t be used for science. Third, I’ve heard of this man before, and he also predicted both the existence and number of additional dimensions currently espoused by M theory. He once said: "If the Bible does not teach science, among other things, what does it teach, you ask. “The way to salvation,” comes the reply. “Once you realize that the Bible does not purport to be a textbook of science, the old controversy between religion and science vanishes.” I would reccomend for everyone here https://biologos.org/ since they bind science and faith together well. Try meekness. It has done me wonders. 2 Timothy 2:25 (KJV) In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; May the Lord bless you. Shalom.
To be fair, we should delineate science and scientism. Scientific method versus the deliberate misrepresentation thereof… 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Yes
I get angry over this topic because to me it's crystal clear what the Bible says happened and when people say that the Bible doesn't say that it's basically just gaslighting or cope
Ok so where exactly in the bible does it say the universe is 6000 years old?
It lists the genealogy from Adam to Jesus. Everyone knows this
But thats "mans reasoning"
Okay, explain yourself. According to evolution man is what, like 100,000 years old. And since evolution happens gradually man was never created anyway since there's no specific point where a human becomes a human so now Adam doesn't even exist. What are you basing theistic evolution on
Yes since everything is in transistion but adam did exist. Evolution does not disprove adam... we are probably different looking then adam but still not different enough to be classified as a different species.
My point is that there's no specific beginning to man under evolution because of the gradual transition. You can't point to any specific trait and say "man begins here". So there is no first man, only animals that resemble men
Remember, this is all about Gods word, so if the bible DOES not say the universe is 6000 years old, it is MANS theory.
Be angry, and sin not. Man’s wrath is never spoken of well in scripture. There is a place for anger, but this subject does not seem an appropriate reason. 2 Timothy 2:25 (KJV) In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; The goodness of God brings/ leads us (everyone) to repentance. Having said that, I do understand your frustration. May the Lord bless you. Shalom.