VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:36:43 06/03/99 Thu
Author: Kevin
Subject: Re: Time continued
In reply to: daniel 's message, "Re: Time continued" on 10:05:22 06/01/99 Tue

>
> So is basic hermeneutics different or the same as
> radiometric dating? We both use tools, we both rely
> on evidence and hope for wisdom to help us understand.
>

The earth is full of physical evidence that blows your hermeneutics out of the water. By the way Radiometric dating is but one of the tools. The heavens declare the glory of God - and the heavens declare your hermeneutics wrong. Hope harder!

>
> I never suggested inadmissible, I am suggesting that
> we are ignorant despite the number of PHD's behind any
> issue.
>

Yes, but we are slowing getting wiser. Galeleo has finally been exhonorated.

>
> Nicely stated, however, the object I choose to focus
> on is the bible.
>

OK, but you do so on blind faith. Which is wonderful, but don't pretend the physical evidence backs up your position. It does not. No matter how hard you twist it.

>
> Progressive revelation includes scientific findings?


The physical evidence not the theories.


> And when science changes so does the revelation of


The evidence does not change, just our understanding of it.


> God. From geocentricity to helocentricity. The bible


That wasn't the scientist's fault - they were working under dogmatic restraints based on a faulty hermeneutic.


> teaches geocentricity in the relationship of God to
> man, but the bible didn't claim geocentricity in the
> "scientific sense". You would have been a geocentrist

that's right.

> up until science changed it's opinion to it's
> empiracle observations. If I knew what I understand
> about hermeneutics now - then, I would have not been
> phased by the sudden change.
>


Then in a few years you might be ready to face reality. Cool!

> Because science seems to be such an integral part of
> your faith, I am curious if science could dissuade you
> from believing a virgin birth or resurrection.
>

My faith is based on my personal encounter with Jesus Christ. I need no proof that He is alive - He has spoken directly to me and I am forever changed.

>
> deeper=OEC
>

OK, if you insist. The Jews believe you should read Scripture then read it again. Why (besides it is a good idea)? Because it is layered.

>
> It does not rely on scripture, it forces it's meaning
> onto scripture. It is a severe bastardization of the
> text. BTW, it too is a very new and young
> interpretation. Younger than YEC... :)
>
>

Day/age and the gap theory were the most popular theories of the last century. The fundamentals even gives reference to the day/age theory. Of course the scopes monkey trial pushed YEC to the forefront. Faith based on fear (even though unfounded fear).

> OK, but I am speaking towards history as documented by
> man. There seems to be about a 5000yr drop date of
> evidence available about man's existence on earth (ie
> written).
>

Not sure your date of the earliest writing is entirely correct, but pretty close. How did science arrive at this date? Of course! They got this date from radiometric dating methods! Amazing how you can accept a date when it is to your favor. Of course there are thousands of years of illiterate human fossils before this date. And no writings in the Cambrian strata, the Jurassic strata, the....

> Be fair for a moment this book is 950pages of detailed
> accounts of paleoarcheological suppression of
> scientific evidence and findings. I do not care what
> your interpretation is, but this is the most
> forthright position this huge document claims. In
> addition Dr. Phillip Johnson supports this work.
>

Scientific conspiracies? Are you serious? Now, if you mean to push evolution, then I might agree, but the age of the earth being purposely hidden? That is silly. Science is a business. If lab 'A' won't reveal the truth, lab 'B' will - especially if they can make a profit off of it. Think about it Daniel, you know I'm right. Greed is one thing the world understands.

> Complex Assumptive Literalism = OEC
>

supressionism = YEC

> I wonder what Adam thought of the pre-adamic race of
> animals. Wow, they look just like me, but they act
> like stupid robots, who bury their dead and paint
> pretty pictures. I hope they don't mind if I
> permanently borrow their vases, since I am not a
> potter.
>

Animals are not robots. Where do you get this absurd stuff?

>
> The bible makes no such claim?
>
> By whose authority to we accept any biblical claim?
>

Good question. I just accept it on faith. Do you believe the Bible to be the innerent infallible word of God? I believe the original revelations given by God to man were innerent and infallible. But they were given to fallen man. Still, Scripture is the closest of any written thing to perfection we have today.

> Descriptions of Young Earth Evidence
>

Sorry, I am not going to chase your rabbits. I have learned from the past that it is pointless. I could disprove every item you have listed, and you would just give me ten more - which would be fine, but you will never learn anything from it.

>
> As I already posted on this very issue the
> 1day=1000yrs has nothing to do with a difference God's
> time and ours, it has everything to do with God's
> everlasting mercy and grace. He withholds judgment.
> Pls review this topic in context and you will KNOW
> that it has nothing to do with some multi-dimensional
> difference between man and God.
>

In the context of our discussion Adam did not die within 24 hours of eating the fruit. Martyr sumised Adam died within the thousand year day of God. That is the only point I was making, not that Martyr understood multi-dimensionality.

> God is eternal forever, we are are eternal forward.
>

Yes, your getting it.

>> Don't even go there. Have you read his page?
>
> I am telling you what he wrote to me in an email.
>

Then you haven't read his page? I'll not pursue this further.

>
> Is the Table of Nations literal?
>

Morris and crew have concluded the earth may be as old as 10,000 years. Does that mean they don't believe it to be literal?

>
> Have you read the Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal?
>

I have read many of it's articles.

>
> Fraid to tell it like it is....Maybe Java man and Adam
> shared a valley together. Maybe Adam named Java.
>

Maybe.

>
> No what is the difference? If I am in this universe,
> I get wiped out, but if I am in another universe I
> stay dry?
>

Universal = all mankind exstinquished but earth not completely covered by water. Can I prove it? Nope. Haven't tried to.

> I have simply refutted the OEC claim that the flood
> was local or universally local. That is why Ed
> started this whole thread.
>
> What was the reason for the Global Flood?
>
>
> You sound like Hank time and time again.
>

Hank?

>
> You mean look at OEC science and it all falls apart.
> BTW, saving grace in the realworld seems to fall apart
> quite often. Must be that freewill thing getting in
> the way again.
>
>

Your point? Has nothing to do with the age of the earth.

>
> So why is God not the object of evil? In a court of
> law, if you have foreknowledge of an event you too can
> be found guilty for the same crime.
>

How would you propose God deal with us then? Keep bad people from being born? Zap 'em dead before they do wrong? Sure glad God doesn't think like you or we wouldn't be having this conversation. God's ways are not our ways. Thank You Jesus.

> Why does the prayer of one man fail in the midst of
> the success of another within the same tragedy?
> Especially if God is not hold any one man higher than
> another.
>

I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. Will we accept only good from God and not bad?

> > Your analogy fails because world time and game time
> > are based on the same timeline. Even playing the game
> > while traveling near the speed of light, where time
> > dilation would come into play, will not help you.
> > Still same timeline. At the speed of light time is
> > virtually meaningless.
>
> Great science fiction, but NOW would always be the
> same especially in a Geocentric universe. Why do you
> stop there? Quantum physics suggests that there are
> multiple universes, multiple space time continuums.
> Science has now provided you with an avenue for
> universe where all potential outcomes are actualized.
> Hitler a great humanitarian and Clinton celebate.
>

Prove it. You can't because it is theory not physical evidence. See the difference.

>
> Please provide any examples of God not being limited
> to the NOW.
>

Revelations - oh, wait that is just God's wishful thinking.

>
> As I recall poorly exegete of passages using the greek
> term chronos. Don't you think that if God knew the
> future you could find something a little more
> substantial? Think aboout it, the answer is Prophecy.
> Yet even that breaks down, because prophecy does not
> have to be pre-written future, it is merely God's
> pre-determined will. His will changes based on the
> actions of his creation unless he is really determined.
>(read below)
>

God relates to us in time so we can perceive and understand Him. I already said if it makes you happy I'll agree with you God has limited Himself to now - whether He has to be or not is beside the point. This applies to the verse below as well.

>
> Jer 15:1
> 1 Then the LORD said to me, "Even if Moses and Samuel
> stood before Me, My mind would not be favorable toward
> this people. Cast them out of My sight, and let them
> go forth.
> (NKJ)
>
> Why would God say such a thing?????? It appears that
> Moses and Samuel must have had some success changing
> God's mind.
>
>
> Daniel

Vacation has arrived. I'm outta here. Just as well, I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall, or a teenager.

Peace
Kevin

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.