Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | A thought about the Flood | Bible general Archive 2 | mark d seyler | 141175 | ||
Hi Greentwiga, I've been perusing some material recently that has some information on these issues. Considering a water canopy above the atmosphere as described in Genesis, the amount of cosmic radiation absorbed by creatures before the flood would be greatly reduced. When measured and evaluated by today's rates of absorption, it would falsly indicate extreme age. According to many published and accepted experiments, the speed of light is slowing down. A faster lightspeed in antiquity indicates a smaller, newer, universe. The fact is, all of these things you have named as methods of dating assume that all things continue as they were since creation. The fact is, we really don't know what conditions were like before the flood. One guess is that the atmospheric pressure may have been double. That is aproximately what is required for pterdactyls to fly. Just this one change would alter the way all life lives and grows. Since oxygen is a primary catalyst in this world, virtually all reactions would happen faster, plants would grow faster, and we really don't know what all the differences are. The truth of the matter is that accepting or rejecting Christ is a spiritual matter. If I wish to reject Jesus, I will come up with any number of excuses. Chuck Missler gives an excellent presentation regarding the speed of light and the age of the universe, in collaboration with some of the primary research scientists in the field. His website is www.khouse.org. The bones are there. Man says he knows how old they are, but the Bible says differently. I believe the Bible. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
2 | A thought about the Flood | Bible general Archive 2 | greentwiga | 141179 | ||
Thanks. This is a more honest attempt to answer the questions I raised. It is a different Biblical theory than the theory of God creating an earth with apparant age, but it also attempts to answer the questions. Both are better than just throwing out scientific facts. Thanks again. Greentwiga |
||||||
3 | A thought about the Flood | Bible general Archive 2 | mark d seyler | 141185 | ||
Hi Greentwiga, Once upon a time I thought God must have created the earth with apparent age. Someone pointed out to me that God is not a deceiver, and so I began to look for something different. I believe the Bible will always agree with accurate science. I understand that the current cutting edge of the science of origins is "intelligent design", as scientist are beginning to recognize that this couldn't have just "happened". I hope that opens their eyes. The answers are out there! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
4 | A thought about the Flood | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 141230 | ||
I myself believe accurate science will always agree with the Bible. "Science does not contradict the Bible. Oh, hundreds of times, the Bible has contradicted science β and science has in due turn been found to be wrong.β (Truths That Transform - D. James Kennedy) There is no contradiction between true science and what the Bible actually says, as opposed to what people think it says. |
||||||