mark63534 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i'd say that the bible is a couple thousand years old, and all that crap in our science book saying that the world came out of nothing, is WRONG!!! God formed the world himself; you can read it in Genesis chap 1-10 In The Bible please(KJV). everyone should know that the world is roughly 6k+ years old because of B.C. and A.D. first of all, the earth IS NOT a billion+ years old. they say that because of carbon dating. second, B.C. means Before Christ. I'm saying that probably Before Christ was all about the events in The OLD Testament. And the NEW Testament is probably about Jesus' birth and all that he'd done on earth. Probably half of the New testament is about Jesus and what he did for us. Third, A.D. means (correct me if i'm wrong) Anno Dommni which means Jesus' birth +what he did until now. so right now its 2007 A.D. EDIT: your question,rite? I think the ancient egyptian stuff is not fake. I think it was real what really happened to the hebrews. I don't think it is any different to the stories in the Bible. well, maybe a little. i gotta research. Click Here 4 My Crafting Guide!Yes, I Do have over 100,000+ Emails. I get about 100+ every day. Want some? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
issy2 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i'd say that the bible is a couple thousand years old, and all that crap in our science book saying that the world came out of nothing, is WRONG!!! God formed the world himself; you can read it in Genesis chap 1-10 In The Bible please(KJV).. Please don't take this the wrong way and I mean no offence but it seems like you are exactly the kind of person who gives Christians a bad name. You base all your beliefs on a book. I don't have anything in particular against Christianity - just the people who assume it's all correct just because it's in a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i'd say that the bible is a couple thousand years old, and all that crap in our science book saying that the world came out of nothing, is WRONG!!! God formed the world himself; you can read it in Genesis chap 1-10 In The Bible please(KJV). everyone should know that the world is roughly 6k+ years old because of B.C. and A.D. first of all, the earth IS NOT a billion+ years old. they say that because of carbon dating. second, B.C. means Before Christ. I'm saying that probably Before Christ was all about the events in The OLD Testament. And the NEW Testament is probably about Jesus' birth and all that he'd done on earth. Probably half of the New testament is about Jesus and what he did for us. Third, A.D. means (correct me if i'm wrong) Anno Dommni which means Jesus' birth +what he did until now. so right now its 2007 A.D. EDIT: your question,rite? I think the ancient egyptian stuff is not fake. I think it was real what really happened to the hebrews. I don't think it is any different to the stories in the Bible. well, maybe a little. i gotta research. For a guy who seems so sure of himself (and saying carbon dating is wrong... why?) you sure use the words "probably" and "I think" a lot. I mean, you're guessing at the proportions that the Bible is built of. Have you even read more than 3 verses of it? Seems like you're pushing a blind faith in something you don't even understand :-w . Sometimes I wonder if people just act this stupid to try and start a riot for their own amusement. I did detect a hint of sarcasm in that post, especially in the first line :-k . [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Einstein was a brilliant scientist. Although was his beleif universally true? If not then why should I care what his beleif is? Saying religion has to correlate with science is completley true. We have science which produces evidence, and therefore christianity to be valid should fit with science. If not then it leads us to God being able to changes the laws of his creation and so makes all science invalid. Or to sum up your argument 'God created it, so he can change it!' Which doesn't fit at all in a debate if the rules can change. Infact it's not a debate. It's faith in God which isn't a debate. 1. God created science 2. Science therefore does not have to correlate with my correct religion because God created it and can therefore change it. 3. Therefore God exists. That isn't a valid argument. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plectrum Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Einstein was a brilliant scientist. Although was his beleif universally true? If not then why should I care what his beleif is? Saying religion has to correlate with science is completley true. We have science which produces evidence, and therefore christianity to be valid should fit with science. If not then it leads us to God being able to changes the laws of his creation and so makes all science invalid. Or to sum up your argument 'God created it, so he can change it!' Which doesn't fit at all in a debate if the rules can change. Infact it's not a debate. It's faith in God which isn't a debate. 1. God created science 2. Science therefore does not have to correlate with my correct religion because God created it and can therefore change it. 3. Therefore God exists. That isn't a valid argument. I never said God created it, so he can change. I also never said science doesn't have to correlate with religion. But I will state now that they do correlate. I never said that because, Einstein, is a brilliant man that it makes religion right. I was just using Einstein as an example of common sense. Someone on this topic said that religion and common sense don't go hand in hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigra00 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i'd say that the bible is a couple thousand years old, and all that crap in our science book saying that the world came out of nothing, is WRONG!!! God formed the world himself; you can read it in Genesis chap 1-10 In The Bible please(KJV). everyone should know that the world is roughly 6k+ years old because of B.C. and A.D. first of all, the earth IS NOT a billion+ years old. they say that because of carbon dating. second, B.C. means Before Christ. I'm saying that probably Before Christ was all about the events in The OLD Testament. And the NEW Testament is probably about Jesus' birth and all that he'd done on earth. Probably half of the New testament is about Jesus and what he did for us. Third, A.D. means (correct me if i'm wrong) Anno Dommni which means Jesus' birth +what he did until now. so right now its 2007 A.D. EDIT: your question,rite? I think the ancient egyptian stuff is not fake. I think it was real what really happened to the hebrews. I don't think it is any different to the stories in the Bible. well, maybe a little. i gotta research. Good theory, man. You're a crack scientists, for sure! I mean, the Earth is 6,000 years old because of the recorded history or BC and AD? That's amazing science right there. :roll: 4000-ish BC is how far back recorded time goes. That's not all of history. I've said it 100 times, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Earth to be 6,000 years old. The Egyptians were building massive pyramids and enslaving nations 6,000 years ago...That's not something you do over-night. Furthermore, people seem to think Adam and Eve had a million offspring come from them in the course of a year. If Adam and Eve were the original first people, I'm sure you could do the math and see that to get that many people (that were around back then, using estimates) it would have taken thousands of years itself. Again, the Earth isn't 6,000 years old. 0% chance. No. Chance. Ever. The popularity of any given religion today depends on the victories of the wars they fought in the past. - Me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
issy2 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You know, this thread is a war between Science and Religion. The bible can't be true because carbon dating (or whatever crap) is over 6000 years old!! Yes it can, the bible says so u prat!! But what if we stopped taking science for fact? I mean who's to say all the world's carbon didn't get jacked by a load of Martians from outer space and then replaced with new carbon 6000 years ago? So if we took being narrow-minded to the opposite extreme, you might as well just admit there's no point arguing over this, because we'll never know... And please don't pull the but-science-says-it's right! card because that's the whole point... if you were to stop taking science for fact, nothing would ever be proved.. BTW I am not a creationist or Christian-basher. Just pointing out a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You got to think about these guys: If there is other life out there then that disproves alot of what was said in the Bible, AND disproves the universe is 6000 years old, it would of taken alot longer to develop this kind of technology; perhaps millions or, if these little dudes are travelling galaxies or hopping universes, BILLIONS of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumpta Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You know, this thread is a war between Science and Religion. Exactly. And it's complete nonsense to put the one against the other, when they can easily go hand in hand, EVEN if they not always do or have done. On the one hand -and I can only speak for the catholic church because I don't know about the other christian communities-, for hundreds of years, the church has pumped millions into schooling, research and education, long before it was any concern to politicians. The church may have had its hidden or not so hidden agenda in doing this, but there simply is no denying that science wouldn't be where it is now without the church's long-standing support. On the other hand, like someone else mentioned, you have for example Einstein, who was a firmly religious person, which to me proves that even great scientists seem to be able to seemlessly reconcile the two. Not only in the past, but even today. If scientists themselves can, why is it so hard for some of you to accept this possibility, even if it goes against your personal beliefs, whether they are atheist; anticlerical (that would me, lol); christian; agnostic;... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 i'd say that the bible is a couple thousand years old, and all that crap in our science book saying that the world came out of nothing, is WRONG!!! God formed the world himself; you can read it in Genesis chap 1-10 In The Bible please(KJV). everyone should know that the world is roughly 6k+ years old because of B.C. and A.D. first of all, the earth IS NOT a billion+ years old. they say that because of carbon dating. second, B.C. means Before Christ. I'm saying that probably Before Christ was all about the events in The OLD Testament. And the NEW Testament is probably about Jesus' birth and all that he'd done on earth. Probably half of the New testament is about Jesus and what he did for us. Third, A.D. means (correct me if i'm wrong) Anno Dommni which means Jesus' birth +what he did until now. so right now its 2007 A.D. EDIT: your question,rite? I think the ancient egyptian stuff is not fake. I think it was real what really happened to the hebrews. I don't think it is any different to the stories in the Bible. well, maybe a little. i gotta research. Mark, have a look into radiometric dating. Research it, seriously. And perhaps you would like to take a look at my topic called "the challenge." Give it a look, and give it a go to show us all how right you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 This thread isn't a war, you can only expect a few negative comments in a debate. Besides, this thread was meant to be a Religion vs Whatever thread, look at the title. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedepressedsquirrel Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 You got to think about these guys: QFT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Sorry, I'm not big on acronyms. It's still good evidence against 6000 year old universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedepressedsquirrel Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Sorry, I'm not big on acronyms. It's still good evidence against 6000 year old universe. QFT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Sorry, I'm not big on acronyms. It's still good evidence against 6000 year old universe. QFT :-k I don't follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I tried to start a subject and I'll try again. Can someone come up with evidence that ETs don't disprove young Earth? :) You got to think about these guys: If there is other life out there then that disproves alot of what was said in the Bible, AND disproves the universe is 6000 years old, it would of taken alot longer to develop this kind of technology; perhaps millions or, if these little dudes are travelling galaxies or hopping universes, BILLIONS of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giordano Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! "The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you never hear it you'll never know what justice is." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flametrooper Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I don't care what people think because people think incest is good... Well mr. Defender, I respect you and all, but here you say, "I don't care what you think, because you disagree with me on a certain issue." Not cool. Not cool at all. -10 points on that one. I may as well say, "I don't care what you think, because you think incest is bad." I'm making just as much sense, and being just as smart, as you were, with this statement. (Besides, who in this thread ever said incest was good anyways? The consensus has been a NO on incest and a YES on homosexuality, it seems, except you and Xplsvbam, maybe a few others.) :shame: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! They knew the earth was round before 300 BC. Get your facts straight. And has been said time and time again, the Bible is valued for it's moral guidelines, not for the literal truth of the stories it tells. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender2516 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I don't care what people think because people think incest is good... Well mr. Defender, I respect you and all, but here you say, "I don't care what you think, because you disagree with me on a certain issue." Not cool. Not cool at all. -10 points on that one. I may as well say, "I don't care what you think, because you think incest is bad." I'm making just as much sense, and being just as smart, as you were, with this statement. (Besides, who in this thread ever said incest was good anyways? The consensus has been a NO on incest and a YES on homosexuality, it seems, except you and Xplsvbam, maybe a few others.) :shame: *Still Waiting 4 Real Debate and not some stuff kids make up in their mind* :shame: Once again.. if you think its right, you need your head examined.. Or why don't I say this.. show me evidence that its RIGHT. Then you will prove me wrong? No, Evidence is not someone's opinion on the situation.. I want hardcore evidence! And if you cannot provide it.. then why are you asking me to provide it when you can't even hold your own ground? ~Defender~ If you love me, send me a PM. 8 - Love me2 - Hate me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I don't care what people think because people think incest is good... Well mr. Defender, I respect you and all, but here you say, "I don't care what you think, because you disagree with me on a certain issue." Not cool. Not cool at all. -10 points on that one. I may as well say, "I don't care what you think, because you think incest is bad." I'm making just as much sense, and being just as smart, as you were, with this statement. (Besides, who in this thread ever said incest was good anyways? The consensus has been a NO on incest and a YES on homosexuality, it seems, except you and Xplsvbam, maybe a few others.) :shame: *Still Waiting 4 Real Debate and not some stuff kids make up in their mind* :shame: Once again.. if you think its right, you need your head examined.. Or why don't I say this.. show me evidence that its RIGHT. Then you will prove me wrong? No, Evidence is not someone's opinion on the situation.. I want hardcore evidence! And if you cannot provide it.. then why are you asking me to provide it when you can't even hold your own ground? ~Defender~ Can we debate what this thread was intended to debate? Extra-terrestrials disproving 6000 year-old Earth, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! At least get what you're writing correct first, before you flame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! At least get what you're writing correct first, before you flame. That's not flaming as it's not directed at anyone here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! At least get what you're writing correct first, before you flame. Even though he may not have the year historically correct, he makes a good point, unless, of course, you don't take the bibal as literal fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Im going to start saying "The Bible is the biggest load of bull [cabbage] ever." When was the Bible written? Around 100 AD, and YET people believe the 'facts' is says? Come on...they thought the world was flat! Yet some of us comit our lives to follow a book not even written by Jesus nor God phsyically. No sir, written by men who 'heard' stories. These could of been folktales for all we know, or twisted it to suit their needs. Afterall humans are filled with sins! At least get what you're writing correct first, before you flame. Even though he may not have the year historically correct, he makes a good point, unless, of course, you don't take the bibal as literal fact. Exacto. I don't take it as literal fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now