If there is no God. Then someone explain life.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So the professor finally figured out how to hook up internet service on Gilligans Island,  huh? Amazing what you can do with a couple of coconut shells, eh?

Eh?

[trdsf]

Everyone evolves but from what is the question.

An earlier life form.  It's really pretty straightforward.  You can follow the chain all the way back to a chance chemical accident about 3.5 to 4 billion years ago, when something self-replicating with sufficient accuracy for meaningful evolution arose, by accident, from something self-replicating but without sufficient accuracy to allow for meaningful evolution.  When you consider the uncounted quintillions of random chemical experiments going on driven by tides and heat and ultraviolet radiation, life starts looking pretty probable.

I fail to see the problem.

[g2perk]

An earlier life form.  It's really pretty straightforward.  You can follow the chain all the way back to a chance chemical accident about 3.5 to 4 billion years ago, when something self-replicating with sufficient accuracy for meaningful evolution arose, by accident, from something self-replicating but without sufficient accuracy to allow for meaningful evolution.  When you consider the uncounted quintillions of random chemical experiments going on driven by tides and heat and ultraviolet radiation, life starts looking pretty probable.

I fail to see the problem.

Your way over my head thereðŸ'€

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[Blackleaf]

As for as the earth being over 14 billion years old that is just a theory according to multiple scholars. The big bang is a theory as well. Since most of the measurement merely involve the counting of annual layers, they are unlikely to be grossly inaccurate. Therefore, the young earth paradigm that the earth is merely 6,000 years old is falsified by both the Bible and science. The vast ages of the earth does not diminish the power and glory of God, but establishes that God thought that preparing the earth for human habitation was worth the billion of years of preparation Since God is not subject to the temporal dimension of this universe,it all happened "instantly" for Him.

Bologna. The Gospel hinges on the literal interpretation of the Old Testament. It begins with Adam and Eve, the ancestors of every human alive, screwing up and God punishing them and all of their offspring for it. Without that, there is no need for a savior. Jesus was even referred to as the "Second Adam" because his role was to reverse the curse of original sin. The problem, though, is that the Old Testament also gives a pretty clear timeline. God created the world in seven days. Adam and Even had children who begat their own children, who begat others. We go from there to Noah, to Moses, to Isaiah, and finally to the New Testament. From the information provided by the Bible, we can draw a direct line from Jesus to Adam in their family trees. This is where the 6000 year timeline came from. They calculated how many generations the Bible claimed there to be and estimated the number of years since creation. So if the 6000 year timeline is wrong, then the entire foundation for Christianity is also wrong.

[trdsf]

Your way over my head there

This does not surprise me.

[trdsf]

As for as the earth being over 14 billion years old that is just a theory according to multiple scholars. The big bang is a theory as well. Since most of the measurement merely involve the counting of annual layers, they are unlikely to be grossly inaccurate. Therefore, the young earth paradigm that the earth is merely 6,000 years old is falsified by both the Bible and science. The vast ages of the earth does not diminish the power and glory of God, but establishes that God thought that preparing the earth for human habitation was worth the billion of years of preparation Since God is not subject to the temporal dimension of this universe,it all happened "instantly" for Him.

Wow, what a profound misunderstanding of current theory.  The Earth is estimated to be approximately 4.5 billion years old, not 'over 14 billion'.  The universe itself is estimated to be 13.7 billion years old, not 14 billion.  Please attack actual current theory, not numbers you've made up, with your unsupported nonsense.

Using the phrase "just a theory" means you haven't got the faintest idea what a theory actually is.  Hint: it isn't a guess.

[g2perk]

Bologna. The Gospel hinges on the literal interpretation of the Old Testament. It begins with Adam and Eve, the ancestors of every human alive, screwing up and God punishing them and all of their offspring for it. Without that, there is no need for a savior. Jesus was even referred to as the "Second Adam" because his role was to reverse the curse of original sin. The problem, though, is that the Old Testament also gives a pretty clear timeline. God created the world in seven days. Adam and Even had children who begat their own children, who begat others. We go from there to Noah, to Moses, to Isaiah, and finally to the New Testament. From the information provided by the Bible, we can draw a direct line from Jesus to Adam in their family trees. This is where the 6000 year timeline came from. They calculated how many generations the Bible claimed there to be and estimated the number of years since creation. So if the 6000 year timeline is wrong, then the entire foundation for Christianity is also wrong.

Okay so what is not true. I do believe the bible says it took 6000 yrs.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[g2perk]

Wow, what a profound misunderstanding of current theory.  The Earth is estimated to be approximately 4.5 billion years old, not 'over 14 billion'.  The universe itself is estimated to be 13.7 billion years old, not 14 billion.  Please attack actual current theory, not numbers you've made up, with your unsupported nonsense.

Using the phrase "just a theory" means you haven't got the faintest idea what a theory actually is.  Hint: it isn't a guess.

I believe you need to read previous post. I do understand better now.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[Blackleaf]

Okay so what is not true. I do believe the bible says it took 6000 yrs.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

In the post I was quoting, you were arguing that the 6000 years timeline was fabricated. Are you now saying that the earth really is 6000? If so, do you also believe that the earth is flat, or that the moon is made of cheese?

[g2perk]

In the post I was quoting, you were arguing that the 6000 years timeline was fabricated. Are you now saying that the earth really is 6000? If so, do you also believe that the earth is flat, or that the moon is made of cheese?

Well you know people are not perfect right. And what he wrote in his story was wrong yes.

It took God six days to create the earth and the seventh day he rested. All this according to the bible. Because as YOU said its literal. Put this together:

To prove it God said one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.  Took 6 days, 6000 years later.

2 Peter 3:8King James Version (KJV)

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.



Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[trdsf]

Well you know people are not perfect right. And what he wrote in his story was wrong yes.

It took God six days to create the earth and the seventh day he rested. All this according to the bible. Because as YOU said its literal. Put this together:

To prove it God said one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.  Took 6 days, 6000 years later.

2 Peter 3:8King James Version (KJV)

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Either six days, or six thousand years, either way it's demonstrably wrong.  You're welcome to believe it, as long as you understand that it's not in the slightest supported by every single shred of evidence.  You cannot say it's true, you can only say you believe it.

[g2perk]

This does not surprise me.

I bet not much does...ðŸ˜,

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[trdsf]

I believe you need to read previous post. I do understand better now.

If you're still clinging to claiming any age for the Earth under four billion years, no, you don't.

[Blackleaf]

Well you know people are not perfect right. And what he wrote in his story was wrong yes.

It took God six days to create the earth and the seventh day he rested. All this according to the bible. Because as YOU said its literal. Put this together:

To prove it God said one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.  Took 6 days, 6000 years later.

2 Peter 3:8King James Version (KJV)

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.



Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

1. If God chose one line in a completely different book to explain that 6 days = 6000 years, then why the hell did he tell the writers of his perfect word to write that he did it all in six days in the first place? Does he just like to confuse us?

2. Why does this quote from 2 Peter only apply to the first chapter of Genesis? Matthew 4:2 says, "After fasting forty days and forty nights, he [Jesus] was hungry." Did Jesus fast for 40,000 years?

3. This still wouldn't fix the problem because the universe would be 12,000 years old, the earth itself would be 10,000 years old, and human history would still be a mere 6000 years because Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day. All of these numbers are still much too low to fit with what science has proven to be reality.

4. Does that mean that God also took a 1000 year break after creating Adam? No wonder Adam rebelled. Adam should be commended for his patience in waiting for so long.

5. Who is the "he" you're talking about? What story?

[trdsf]

I bet not much does...

Lots of things surprise me.  That's why I love reality.  It doesn't have to conform to my opinions.