Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
84 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 83 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 892,997 Year: 4,109/6,534 Month: 323/900 Week: 29/150 Day: 2/27 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The not so distant star light problem
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1279
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 74 of 111 (711070)
11-14-2013 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by shalamabobbi
11-13-2013 8:59 PM


Ok. Thank you. But my thread, despite the side discussions about starlight, is about the sun. Is it your view that the way sunlight reached the earth may have been supernatural?

Yes. Not only reached the earth, which only takes a few minutes even now, but the way it originally developed within the sun at creation. Which may not be the way it works now, in the way God sustains it, but only in the way he created it.

This is one reason I asked you for your view of creation because without this input I don't know if you disagree with the OP.

Yes, I disagree with the entire tone of your OP, including this line;

quote:
you cannot shorten the time required to fit the text of the Bible.

You can, if the supernatural is considered.

Ok if it is clear to you then please express it differently and maybe it'll become clear to me. From my perspective this is a contradiction. You are saying that this is something humans are incapable of understanding and yet somehow that it is clear?

Exactly, it's possible to understand the fact that something happened, without knowing the details of how it happened. A person can use a flashlight without knowing exactly how it works. An atheist can believe abiogenesis happened without knowing how it worked.

Is it saying that the creation period really was a very long period of time? Even longer than the presently accepted age of the universe, because humans are capable of understanding that, so it must be longer?

"Long" isn't a consideration if it happened in a time realm that is outside of the simple, one dimension time frame that humans know about.

Are you referring to aspects of reality of which we are presently unaware? Or do you mean that you think we are incapable of understanding the reality of which we are aware? Are you simply distinguishing between God's manner of creation and his resulting creation once completed?

Yes.

marc9000 writes:

Why, they (including you) haven't let me know theirs, have they?

You are the one challenging the scientific viewpoint. We are not.

I guess you got me there. I would think maybe the thread starter would have the burden of sharing his worldview so readers would better know where he's coming from in the discussion he's starting, but these are after all the science forums. Secularism/atheism owns them. But there are many threads started here from an atheist viewpoint, who's starter claims to be a "mainstream" Christian, not the 0.00001% of wackos like me who actually believe what the word of God says.

But you do have my answer as to what my beliefs are.

I am sincerely trying to help you, not attack you. I can appreciate that you are sincerely trying to help me.

If you feel outnumbered go get some of your friends and return and launch Armageddon.

I don't need any help. My points are made, I'm almost done in this thread.

But how long did creation week take? Eons of time for each creation day? A thousand years for each creation day? Not 24hrs each because you are not YEC, right?

I don't consider the time frame to be identifiable. I guess I disagree with AIG slightly on that one. I think (in some cases) we have to stop short of trying to identify times for religious purposes, or try to claim that early humans and dinosours lived at exactly the same time, as I think AIG does. I think it's a mistake to go out on that limb.

How big is your God? Bigger than a billion?(credit to ICR for that insight). Mine was only as big as the square root of 31. I never had a problem believing God could work miracles. What caught my attention was not so much the lack of evidence for some of the recorded biblical events as much as the existence of contradictory evidence for those events. Did God create false evidence to test our faith?

Could be, but I think it's clearer that man bends over backwards to dig up false evidence. Or tries too hard to put God to the test, something frowned upon by the one book of the Bible that the scientific community dislikes the most, Genesis.

I know people that believe the fossils of dinosaurs were specially fabricated by God to test our faith. I couldn't remain on board that boat.

This is a result of "putting God to the test", or "leaning on our own understanding".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by shalamabobbi, posted 11-13-2013 8:59 PM shalamabobbi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by shalamabobbi, posted 11-15-2013 3:07 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 79 by shalamabobbi, posted 11-15-2013 3:12 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1279
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 84 of 111 (711334)
11-17-2013 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by shalamabobbi
11-15-2013 3:07 PM


Re: I need to break this into two posts. 1
shalamabobbi writes:

Are you referring to aspects of reality of which we are presently unaware? Or do you mean that you think we are incapable of understanding the reality of which we are aware? Are you simply distinguishing between God's manner of creation and his resulting creation once completed?

marc9000 writes:

Yes.

With this catch-all you can weasel out of the superfluous core observation above. Let's assume that we don't understand the laws of physics correctly(the reality of which we are aware).

Let me go through it in another way then, which sums up my entire position. It does not matter what we understand about physics or any other form of science, it is all completely disconnectable from the supernatural way God created all of reality. If science finds anything that it claims has the ability to falsify a supernatural act, then science is thinking higher of itself than it ought to think, and is no longer a disinterested pursuit of knowledge.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by shalamabobbi, posted 11-15-2013 3:07 PM shalamabobbi has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Tangle, posted 11-17-2013 4:36 PM marc9000 has taken no action
 Message 108 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2014 5:06 PM marc9000 has taken no action

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1279
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 85 of 111 (711335)
11-17-2013 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by shalamabobbi
11-15-2013 3:12 PM


Re: part 2
marc9000 writes:

I don't consider the time frame to be identifiable. I guess I disagree with AIG slightly on that one. I think (in some cases) we have to stop short of trying to identify times for religious purposes, or try to claim that early humans and dinosours lived at exactly the same time, as I think AIG does. I think it's a mistake to go out on that limb.

Of course it is. More contradictory evidence then needs to be dealt with. Simply add the assumption that we cannot even comprehend the words of the bible.

We can't? People do it all the time, some people take such a keen interest in it that it comsumes most of their entire lives. Billy Graham, Charles Spurgeon come to mind. The Bible is very complex, in its history, and in its prescription for living. If someone's talent is in doing something besides spending a lot of time studying it, it can be comparitively simply applied to their lives.

Of course this makes one wonder why God communicates with us in the first place.

I'm glad to see you acknowledge that God communicates with us, most in science don't. The Bible is a very thorough, foolproof way for God to communicate with us. It's the only way he communicates with us, if he did it in any other way, the world, and it's view of him, would be completely different from what they are.

Eventually I encountered enough facts that caused a sufficient level of cognitive dissonance that I began to experience mental blocks that prevented me from not merely accepting the science but from understanding it in the first place. This was a very scary place to arrive at, because I knew, I absolutely knew, that this was damaging and harmful. It finally began to dawn on me that my flavor of superstition that made comprehension taboo could not be a good thing and if it wasn't good it wasn't anything to do with God if there was one.

Today's science education establishment is masterful at catching students at the perfect critical time in their lives, and indoctrinating them into non-religion. Remember, to a small child, the only reason he cannot do some things that he'd like to do is because his parents won't let him. Much later, as an adult, he (hopefully / usually) realizes that there are common sense reasons for not doing something that may seem good (pleasurable) at first glance. The dangerous period is when a child learns that there are limits to parental control, and how to avoid them, yet without nearly enough life experience to know the wisdom of avoiding doing certain things. Roughly the middle school years, though they vary from child to child. The time when "honor thy father and mother", becomes something to seek reasons to circumvent. This is when the scientific community, through education, finds future atheist citizens, to support the political ambitions of the scientific community.

If you don't mind, would you mind starting a thread in the faith and belief forum to elaborate on the merits of refusing to use our minds to think (leaning upon our own understanding) or why you believe it is something worthy of reward in the hereafter. From my recollection this doesn't sit well with the parable about the talents.

I'll go do that now, I should be able to get it in, but high winds are coming, and if it gets much worse I may have to unplug this unit before I get it done.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by shalamabobbi, posted 11-15-2013 3:12 PM shalamabobbi has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022