Any "Young Earthers" here. as in the earth is 6000 years old?

[Inazone]

i am what most of you would consider a "fundamentalist christian"...i DO believe that God created the earth and man as it is written in the bible. i DO believe that the bible is a historical document. i have often struggled with the very issue that we are discussing since i came to my faith later in life.

. . .

call it a cop-out. ridicule me. call me ignorant. it's okay.

how i HAVE come reconcile the conflict between the biblical age of earth vs. the scientific age of earth (and this is frowned upon my some of my church buddies and may even, GASP, contradict my own beliefs - imagine THAT!) is that each of God's seven days was an epoch in time.

. . .

in MY head, the closest way to balance the "young earth" theory and the carbon dating stuff is pretty easy. it is clear dinosaurs were real. it is clear that there were other types of upright walking, man-like creatures walking around a long time ago. shoot, i just saw a whole bunch of bones when i was in DC a month ago. i will NOT debate their existance....

BUT, with the bible being a HISTORICAL book for the hebrew people, it is fair enough to assume (here is where my blasphemy comes into play) that the book of genesis is a creation tale, not unlike those of other cultures around the world. the hebrew people passed this tale down through time until moses put it to paper when he was writing the first 5 books of we now call the bible.

again, i FIRMLY believe this creation tale to be accurate and inspired. BUT, my human mind that seeks concrete answers to big, complex issues that are beyond my intelligence levels, thinks that each of the 7 days in God's creation COULD have been millions or billions of years. during which time these other things could have existed.

i know i will be labeled a contradictory hypocrite by many of you, possibly even my own christian brothers....BUT some of you have been asking for a theory of reconciliation to the "young earth" thought process and the carbon dating "FACT".

I cut some stuff out that didn't apply to my response, but I generally agree with most of this. I was raised Christian, went to Christian schools, and still consider myself a Christian . . . but a lot of my own beliefs were formed well into adulthood. Much as you describe the Bible as being a historical book for the Hebrews, I think of it as containing a strictly limited account of history as it pertains to mankind's relatively short existence on Earth. I don't doubt the divine inspiration of the Bible, but I also don't believe that it was intended to come anywhere close to explaining every mystery of creation or life in general. It was written in a (mostly) simpler time, when people couldn't have imagined the discoveries and wonders and challenges of our modern existence. It's a very focused history.

My reasoning for feeling the way I do is that the Bible doesn't discuss civilizations that were developing at the same time as the Hebrews and their immediate neighbors, and certainly not anything beyond Earth itself in a physical sense. There were amazing things happening in other parts of the world during the time period covered in the Old Testament, but they are beyond the scope of the Bible. Likewise, there really wouldn't be a place for discussions about extraterrestrial life in the Bible. I'm 100% convinced in the existence of intelligent life beyond our own world, but I wouldn't expect to read about it in the Bible. How could I believe in God as being all-powerful and then attempt to limit that by saying that aliens don't exist? And what makes people think that our definitions of life and life-sustaining conditions apply anywhere but here? For that matter, I wouldn't expect our concepts of right and wrong or spirituality to apply.

Generally speaking, I find it both amusing and a little sad that religion and science are more focused on disproving one another than being applied together to delve deeper into some of the true mysteries of the universe. If I was a wealthy man, I'd divide my time between study and travel, looking for the answers that religion and science aren't addressing. I believe that we were created, but not for any grand universal purpose. Each of us as an individual is here whether we like it or not, and have to find our own purpose.

How in the hell can otherwise intelligent people be blind enough to believe that some crazy ass dudes in the desert 2,000 years ago captured all the facts acurately. This was 1,900 years before humans even generally accepted that matter is made of atoms. Or that bacteria and germs cause disease/sickness. 1,500 years prior to witches being burned at the stake!

And if the Bible is an accurate historical document, why are we not killing children for being disrespectful? Why are we not murdering those who have sex with animals? Why are we not offering our daughters up for rape? All these things and many more are MANDATED by the authors of the Bible. I could go on with examples, but I doubt your faith would let a little thing like facts get in the way.

What I'm getting out of your posts is that you consider religious people ignorant for not knowing or accepting critical facets of science, but you haven't put much thought or effort into understanding where they're coming from. The Bible as a historical document wasn't written to explain sickness, unless you're including in that the idea of demonic possession, which I can respect that you don't believe occurs. As for the "punishments" you list, are you not familiar with the differences between the Old and New Testament? There is a reason that one is "Old" and the other "New" beyond just when the events within each occurs. I wouldn't *expect* you to know the difference, but if you're going to use those examples, you should be aware that Old Testament law was replaced by Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. I don't know how the Jewish religion works since they don't recognize Jesus as having the authority to rewrite their laws, but that's a core element of Christianity.

I really don't care what beliefs any one of you holds, if you are being honest to yourself and the people around you about the things that matter. I frankly have no particular use for the fellowship/brotherhood/whatever of organized religion, and don't care if anyone shares my beliefs, even though millions of people claim to, either legitimately or as lip service. I'll respect a Satanist over a "fellow" Christian if the Satanist is being honest with me. However, seeing one person treat another disrespectfully over differing beliefs seems very juvenile to me, and these types of posts are the type that rarely, if ever, would translate into a face-to-face debate. Certainly not in the manner that they are acted out over the Internet.

[lerxstcat]

I am Roman Catholic but believe that the Earth is billions of years old. I think the Bible was written by people of a more primitive culture so God's word to them was dumbed down to a level that primitives would understand.

Pope John Paul II himself wrote in his encyclical Fides Et Ratio that the only reason that faith and science SEEM to be in conflict is that we don't have all the facts. His view was that faith and reason would ultimately support each other, if we had all the facts.

I have a somewhat simple faith; God has the power and I am a creature, He is the Creator. Often I don't understand why He allows things to happen, but I don't have all the facts. One day I will, if I need to know.

The 6,000 year thing is obviously the effort of a medieval theologian to tie together Biblical history and has no real basis in fact as far as dating the Earth or the universe. It really doesn't stand up to even a cursory glance.

[markD]

I cut some stuff out that didn't apply to my response, but I generally agree with most of this. I was raised Christian, went to Christian schools, and still consider myself a Christian . . . but a lot of my own beliefs were formed well into adulthood. Much as you describe the Bible as being a historical book for the Hebrews, I think of it as containing a strictly limited account of history as it pertains to mankind's relatively short existence on Earth. I don't doubt the divine inspiration of the Bible, but I also don't believe that it was intended to come anywhere close to explaining every mystery of creation or life in general. It was written in a (mostly) simpler time, when people couldn't have imagined the discoveries and wonders and challenges of our modern existence. It's a very focused history.

My reasoning for feeling the way I do is that the Bible doesn't discuss civilizations that were developing at the same time as the Hebrews and their immediate neighbors, and certainly not anything beyond Earth itself in a physical sense. There were amazing things happening in other parts of the world during the time period covered in the Old Testament, but they are beyond the scope of the Bible. Likewise, there really wouldn't be a place for discussions about extraterrestrial life in the Bible. I'm 100% convinced in the existence of intelligent life beyond our own world, but I wouldn't expect to read about it in the Bible. How could I believe in God as being all-powerful and then attempt to limit that by saying that aliens don't exist? And what makes people think that our definitions of life and life-sustaining conditions apply anywhere but here? For that matter, I wouldn't expect our concepts of right and wrong or spirituality to apply.

Generally speaking, I find it both amusing and a little sad that religion and science are more focused on disproving one another than being applied together to delve deeper into some of the true mysteries of the universe. If I was a wealthy man, I'd divide my time between study and travel, looking for the answers that religion and science aren't addressing. I believe that we were created, but not for any grand universal purpose. Each of us as an individual is here whether we like it or not, and have to find our own purpose.



What I'm getting out of your posts is that you consider religious people ignorant for not knowing or accepting critical facets of science, but you haven't put much thought or effort into understanding where they're coming from. The Bible as a historical document wasn't written to explain sickness, unless you're including in that the idea of demonic possession, which I can respect that you don't believe occurs. As for the "punishments" you list, are you not familiar with the differences between the Old and New Testament? There is a reason that one is "Old" and the other "New" beyond just when the events within each occurs. I wouldn't *expect* you to know the difference, but if you're going to use those examples, you should be aware that Old Testament law was replaced by Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. I don't know how the Jewish religion works since they don't recognize Jesus as having the authority to rewrite their laws, but that's a core element of Christianity.

I really don't care what beliefs any one of you holds, if you are being honest to yourself and the people around you about the things that matter. I frankly have no particular use for the fellowship/brotherhood/whatever of organized religion, and don't care if anyone shares my beliefs, even though millions of people claim to, either legitimately or as lip service. I'll respect a Satanist over a "fellow" Christian if the Satanist is being honest with me. However, seeing one person treat another disrespectfully over differing beliefs seems very juvenile to me, and these types of posts are the type that rarely, if ever, would translate into a face-to-face debate. Certainly not in the manner that they are acted out over the Internet.

cool. it's nice to know somebody got the gist of what i was implying. thanks for your better explanation.

[fr0sty]

The new testament is contradictory on this subject. There are passages where Jesus states he has not come to abolish the old laws and others where he says the opposite.

As for the "punishments" you list, are you not familiar with the differences between the Old and New Testament? There is a reason that one is "Old" and the other "New" beyond just when the events within each occurs. I wouldn't *expect* you to know the difference, but if you're going to use those examples, you should be aware that Old Testament law was replaced by Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. I don't know how the Jewish religion works since they don't recognize Jesus as having the authority to rewrite their laws, but that's a core element of Christianity.

[Dred]

Peeps, peeps, peeps, we're all JCF bros, and this sandbox is gettin kinda heated.

[Hellbat]

WASSUP MEATBAGS!

These types of discussion are all fine and healthy as long as it stays discussion and doesn't devolve into namecalling and abuse.

Just remember we are here because of the shared love of Jackson and Charvel guitars, whether made by the hand of man or god. ( Where Mike Shannon or Grover fits in is up to you to decide. )

I'm not going to hold someones beliefs against them as long as they don't try to DICTATE mine.

This thread may now continue with the blessings of the flying spaghetti monster...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

[markD]

just curious, how many of you bible experts attend a seminary or hold a degree in christian theology?

how many of you are priests or pastors?

many of you admit to having a strong lack of trust in organized religion/christianty. i find it rather amazing that you have such incredible, intimate knowledge of a book that contains fairy tales you find ridiculous. ironic really, that so many of you want to correct us christian retards on a book that we read and study intimately at least once a week if not more - and some of us have been doing that for years or even close to a life time.

earlier i admitted to not wanting to engage in debate that i was underqualified in which to participate. i think some of you may want to adhere to the same, especially if you are not qualified to diseminate the bible appropriately.

you providing your interpretation of something you 100% fail to understand would be the same as mean attempting to argue quantum physics with even a STUDENT of quantum physics.

this thread originated with a question. a question, that IF answered would only cause heated discussions and MORE anti-christian rhetoric that is often spewed forth in even the MILDEST religious-esque discussions here on the JCF.

it is difficult to have the desire to share you thoughts, opinions and ideas in a hostile environment. it can be fun too, from a sociological standpoint, because i often wonder where some of your hatred for a religion you barely understand comes from.

yeah, you can always fall back on the lame-o argument that the church is about power, money, wars, and that everything bad in the world came from Jesus and his followers. it's weak and has been spewed forth so many times it is only worth yawning over anymore.

hahahahaha, yet some of those things you choose to toss in a believers face are true.

yes, there are STILL people that give christianity a bad name.

there are people that give americans a bad name.

there people that give muslims a bad name.

there are people that give investment brokers a bad name.

there are people that give the homeless a bad name.

there are people that give guitarists a bad name....

i could go on forever. hopefully you get the point.

do you attack everyone else in society that doesn't think what you believe?

do you turn your back on investment brokers because a couple are theives?

do you attack every muslim you see because there are extremists?

or do you only attack christians and their beliefs?

i'd like to know, especially from those of you that have been rather scathing in your words about those that have faith. explain to me your source of infinite knowledge of a book you find to be absurd. explain to me the event(s) in your OWN PERSONAL life that makes you have such an attitude to those of christian faith. bill is excluded, he is cool about these things and has shared his conversion many times. bill may disagree, but he has RESPECT, which many of you do not have.

you ask us to share what we think, then insult us for opinions. don't get me wrong, i am no blazer but i am genuinely interested in the questions i have proposed to you.

ironically, if you can't give me satisfactory answers to these questions i will find all of your spewing to be about as intelligent as you find my belief that the bible is a historical document for the hebrews, that God created earth, and that the earth may only be 6000 years old.

i DO NOT want to hear your scientific babbling to refute the last sentence i wrote. step up. be big boys. answer the questions. wow me with something about your intelligence instead of your attacking bile.

i await some solid answers. one turn deserves another.

[AK47]

Just to clear the air Mark D, you are not a "Young Earth" believer?

I am Catholic so I did not start the thread to attack any people that are into the bible, just wanted to know if there was anyone here that is into "Young Earth". I had always thought it was a fringe belief till I found out on the internet otherwise.

[markD]

i know, i am not a total youngearth believer. my church DOES preach it and it is the doctorine though. i know you didn't start the thread to be aggressive against believers, but it kind of went that way.

all is cool with me, i just want to have some answers since it always goes this way...you know, a one sided discussion.

no sweat. i just wanna hear some backgrounds and answers, that's all.

[Inazone]

Just to clear the air Mark D, you are not a "Young Earth" believer?

I am Catholic so I did not start the thread to attack any people that are into the bible, just wanted to know if there was anyone here that is into "Young Earth". I had always thought it was a fringe belief till I found out on the internet otherwise.

It's unfortunate but almost inevitable (on every music-related forum I know of) that anyone from a religious background will get blasted the moment they state their beliefs . . . even if nobody would hassle them about any other topic. I do think that it has a lot to do with the "detachment" of posting online rather than hashing it out in person, but also with the abundance of information available to people online that previous generations would have to spend a lifetime researching. A lot of it is inaccurate, biased or just plain wrong, but being "in writing" is enough for some folks.

What I do find interesting is that a lot of critics of creation, intelligent design and so on consider Genesis to be a fairy tale, and then find the "Young Earth" types (who presumably believe all of Genesis and likely the rest of the Bible as completely literal) to be oblivious to the scientific theories outlining events from billions of years ago that include humans evolving from microscopic organisms and the universe being birthed from a Big Bang. I personally think that whether you're reading the Bible or volumes of scientific journals, it takes an incredible imagination and considerable mental capacity to comprehend any of it.

My mother, who I am certain is from the Young Earth camp, is not a very imaginative person, but neither is she unintelligent. Rather, she strikes me as the type to accept things at face value and generally ignore anything above, beyond or contradictory to those beliefs if they aren't going to affect her personally. In her 60s and finally retired after raising two sons and working as a preschool teacher, daycare provider and librarian, there's really not much of interest to her in discussions about what happened more than 6000 years ago. Likewise, she doesn't spend any time worrying about what will happen to her when she dies, because she has no doubt in her mind that there's an eternity in heaven awaiting her.

For me, there are already enough questions and mysteries from a "mere" 6000 years to keep me occupied for a long time. Interesting how there are so many questions about our origins and unrecorded history, when most of the really important things that concern current and future generations are all ahead of us.

Suppose we find living beings on Mars or some other planet. Can you imagine some human know-it-all trying to impress upon them the importance of Jesus? Darwin? Einstein? I do find the past fascinating, especially ancient history - I'd love to get a better grasp on early Sumerian and pre-Incan/Aztec/Mayan American civilizations just to name a couple - but the truth of it is that there is only so much recorded information about the past, regardless of the source. Meanwhile, until the end of human existence, the future is inevitably infinite. After that, whether we're all dead or moving on through some manner of afterlife, the past will be over and done with.

[GodOfRhythm]

i know, i am not a total youngearth believer. my church DOES preach it and it is the doctorine though. i know you didn't start the thread to be aggressive against believers, but it kind of went that way.

all is cool with me, i just want to have some answers since it always goes this way...you know, a one sided discussion.

no sweat. i just wanna hear some backgrounds and answers, that's all.

We have finally sailed into my territory it would seem. Since it's 3.30 am and I have a busy weekend coming up, I hope this thread is still around by monday, so I can join in the conversation. It's not so much a discussion.

Agression towards religion is IMHO necessary. It is one of the premium cancers of this world and it is to be abolished.

I am NOT talking about spirituality, which denotes a much more individual experience. I am talking about religion. Spirituality is something to be nurtured and grown. Religion, especially organized religion, is something to be weeded out and peacefully destroyed until every last bit of it is gone. That, unfortunately is an impossible task. And far be it from me to FORCE anyone to give up their religion. No, that is not the way. The way is clear, rational and DECENT education, where no brainwashing is done and also sane families were children are not indoctrinated from year one to believe in these disgusting fairy tales that some wandering nomad tribe, high on mushrooms at the base of Mt. Sinai (FACT) came up with.

The sooner all of those people get on THIS side of the enlightenment the better. Morals are innate to humans (and some other animals as well), we do not get your morals from God or a supreme being.

The sooner we realize this, the sooner we take responsibility for our own actions and the sooner we will actually start embracing empathy, as we realize every human being is the same. Notice how these things are also in Christianity, but pretty much any other religion as well.

Looking forward to "discussing" this in depth.

[SpiralArchitect]

I'm not trying to throw a wrench in the machine here but I would like to point out that
Judaism, Christianity and Islam pull heavily from original "epics" from Sumer/Mesopotamia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

The epic of Gilgamesh and creation and flood myth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_literature

I don't mean to offend anyone but if you can see where these tales of "epic literature" came from you can see how they were passed down THROUGH MEN, told as stories and if current versions of the bible have been edited to suit your/our needs as people, how can you believe them as the word of god, Faith or not? if these stories originated before even the old testament then how can you believe any of that???? These stories were heard by regular people and modified and passed on as a means of control over a local population, essentially a bad case of the telephone game, The bible and other religious texts all suffer from this, so how can anyone place 100% word for word faith in this??
I'm not trying to be negative towards your beliefs and or judge you, I just can't see how anyone can put stock in a story and say it's honest truth??
Sure I have questions, and I have thoughts about our origins and the meaning of life, but really? it seems like people still live as children and have not taken thier blinders off??

I was born into a catholic family and went to catholic grade/high school and stopped being catholic when I was in grade 6, my uncle is a Franciscan Friar and has been to the vatican and has a firm disbelife in religion, he is at heart a scientist and always will be.

He has told me many stories of how the "church" is and the time he spent at the vatican really opened his eyes.....


Meatbag, I love that, that is the best fucking thing I've read in a thread EVER Hellbat, thank you.....we are all just meatbags!!! fantastic!

C

[Dred]

you ask us to share what we think, then insult us for opinions. don't get me wrong, i am no blazer but i am genuinely interested in the questions i have proposed to you.

I haven't read through the comments in the last 5 or so pages at all, maybe picking a random post every once in a while to see the progress of this thread, so I haven't a clue just how heated this conversation actually is. I can only guess that it indeed, is a frying pan. I'll hopefully dig through this in the morning with a clear head.
However, I completely agree with what you said. We keep things civil in the civilised world, so no need for hate.

I'll give a shot at these questions. Just my take.

-No, I don't hold a degree in Christian Theology nor do I attend seminars. That is simply because I've other aspirations in college, so I seek a different course, and I don't attend seminars because there aren't any here, of which I am aware of. However, I do read up a lot from various sources, so while I can't say I am well versed in these matters, I do know something. However, I have read extensively into scientific evidence against Creation, if that holds any value in this case.

-I am neither a priest, nor am I a pastor. In fact, I am not a recognised preacher of any religion, major or otherwise. I am a firm non-believer in any organsed religions, instead drawing a few various moral and philosophical teachings from various cultures, whose traditional religions vary greately. I am not a firm believer in any of such teachings by any means, but I simply refer to them for myself, as I believe they are either morally good, or intriguing enough for me to refer to from time to time. In other words, I do not preach in any manner or form, yet draw from various aspects of such cultures as the ancient Greek and Roman societies. Mainly as a 'hobby', for a lack of a better term.

This isn't an answer to a question, but a response to your statement of irony in us correcting you about somethins you study extensively. I definitely see your point, and I genuinely believe that as a believer , if he/she so desires, will be equally likely to attempt to refute any non believer with support from their respective scripture, that a non-believer will attempt to refute a believer with scientific support. I think it works both ways. A person who believes their belief or opinion is correct, will by default take any directly opposing argument as questionable at the least, often incorrect. An interesting sociological aspect here to note.

The reason to my opposing view to most organised religions, has two aspects. One is that from about when I started reading, which was age four, I was greately interested in our wolrd, majority of my literature being various encyclopedias which have been read over, I don't know how many times. Anything from wildlife, to astronomy, to human and animal anatomy, to history, mostly modern, I read. Fast forward a decade and a half, and I still read science. Basically, since a young age I've had a hunger to see how everything surrounding me works, seeking scientific evidence to gain this knowledge, and simply the supernatural, if I may use this term, never satisfied me when it came to obtaining answers. Throughout the years, while not studying any one particular topic, I've come to somewhat grasp the bare concept of things such as abiogenesis, speciation, protein synthesis, and so on. This provides me answers I seek for such topics as origin of life, evolution, and so on. You can say that my view is the way it is, is simply because I've had a keen interest in technical side of things, and the greater the detail, the better. Having said that, faith simply does not 'do it' for me personally to explain the questions I seek.

Second is the representatives of religion. New or long-established. People such as Kent Hovind and Ben Stein, to name a few, who not only happen to occasionally contradict themselves, but to even spread brazen misinformation about things they do not fully understand themselves, such as using the precise terms of base pairs, genes and alleles interchangeably, as a single example. Deliberate misinformation in scientific matters, is a serious offense against the scientific community, practically always meaning the end of one's career instantaneusly, as it damages the established work of scientists. Scientists losing their jobs because of fraudulent claims has been documented widely enough. I can't give you names, but this information is readily accessable on the internet. I mention this to you as for instance, Hovind's speaches are held as scientific events, while claiming to have a PhD. However, his knowledge is extremely limited and it is quite obvious even at my level. Claiming to be a recognised Doctor, yet making elementary mistakes in what he himself claims to be science, is simply wrong. That is one of the biggest problems I have with people who choose to represent the image of their own theological group, who present deliberate disinformation of proven processes and so forth, such as DNA replication. The second biggest problem I have is the track record of crimes most major world religions have commited. While I would not be able to recall anything personal, I can't simply shrug off 1mn non-combatant casualties of the crusades, the 7/7, Waco siege, witch-hunts, slavery, social inequalities, perjury, inquisitions and so forth.

I hope this suffices as a good answer. I really have to wrap it up, but I can write my lengthy response, if you so wish. I tried to not include any scientifical claims and support, only used various processes as examples, not using them to prove or disprove anything. Just incase you may have misinterpreted my message, that's all.

[toxikdeth]

quit arguing every one is going to have differant opinions. Lets not put down others becuase yours is differant. I may not have a religion but I will not put down others and say theres are wrong. If there is a supreme being I hope he decides your afterlife based on the morals you made not the religion you followed.

[AK47]

We have finally sailed into my territory it would seem. Since it's 3.30 am and I have a busy weekend coming up, I hope this thread is still around by monday, so I can join in the conversation. It's not so much a discussion.

Agression towards religion is IMHO necessary. It is one of the premium cancers of this world and it is to be abolished.

I am NOT talking about spirituality, which denotes a much more individual experience. I am talking about religion. Spirituality is something to be nurtured and grown. Religion, especially organized religion, is something to be weeded out and peacefully destroyed until every last bit of it is gone. That, unfortunately is an impossible task. And far be it from me to FORCE anyone to give up their religion. No, that is not the way. The way is clear, rational and DECENT education, where no brainwashing is done and also sane families were children are not indoctrinated from year one to believe in these disgusting fairy tales that some wandering nomad tribe, high on mushrooms at the base of Mt. Sinai (FACT) came up with.

The sooner all of those people get on THIS side of the enlightenment the better. Morals are innate to humans (and some other animals as well), we do not get your morals from God or a supreme being.

The sooner we realize this, the sooner we take responsibility for our own actions and the sooner we will actually start embracing empathy, as we realize every human being is the same. Notice how these things are also in Christianity, but pretty much any other religion as well.

Looking forward to "discussing" this in depth.

You really are a communist but your the new age commie.

They call themselves "progressives" but if you call them commies to their face you are labeled a stupid racist redneck.

Your pro social healthcare and now you are saying you think religion should be done away with...

Just calling a spade a spade.