Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,485 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 653,763
Pageviews Today: 854,124Threads Today: 164Posts Today: 3,599
08:12 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

The earth is NOT 6000 years old.

 
-
User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 04:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
This is very very simple folks....The earth as we know it can easily be only 6000 years old....ofcourse the materials and matter that it is made up of from space, could easily be billions of years old.With that said what good really is the dating process? Its not.Theres not a wrong answer here...all of them are the right answer you see.The earth is 6000 years old and it is also millions or billions or years old, depending how you look at it.Its both!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28864752



There is no evidence for billions of years once examined.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 04:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Let's address you lunatics one by one.. with evidence.
because you need it badly.

"Have you heard of Jesus? He is a recorded fact by all the historians of the time. Jerusalem? Israel? Hebrews?"

There is a huge gap at the heart of the Jesus story. There is not one single piece of archaeological, forensic or documentary evidence that shows Jesus was ever alive. There is plenty of evidence that people believed that there was a man named Jesus who was killed, but none that he was alive. By that I mean nothing exists from the time of the supposed life of Jesus. No letters exist that mention Jesus the preacher or miracle worker. No Christian letters or diaries, no Jewish ones, no Greek ones, no Roman ones. Nobody wrote about a single aspect of his life while he was living it. Just think for a moment about what the man was supposed to have done. He was supposed to have had meetings with thousands of people. He was supposed to have cured people, even raised a man from the dead. He was supposed to have entered the city of Jerusalem at the head of a triumphal procession and yet nobody wrote anything about it at the time. Not a book, not a diary, not a graffito, not even a sale or return catering order for loaves and fishes. Isn't that just a little hard to believe?

in case you missed it, here is the math that directly proves the flood DID NOT HAPPEN:


How much water would it take?
The total volume of water on Earth is about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers www.space.com, USGS.gov

Volume of a sphere = 4/3 r3 where r=radius

Radius of Earth = 6,378.15 Kilometers

Height of Mt. Everest = 8.85 Kilometers

The volume of water needed to cover Earth to the height of Mt. Everest is approximately the difference in volume of a sphere needed to encompass Mt. Everest and the volume of a sphere the size of the Earth.

Volume of a sphere encompassing the Earth at sea level
= 4/3 (6,378.15 KM)3 = 1,086,825,918,019 KM3

Volume of a sphere encompassing Mt. Everest
= 4/3 (6,378.15 + 8.85 KM)3 = 1,091,388,460,971 KM3

The Difference = 4,530,488,766 KM3

Notice that this is more than 3 TIMES the amount of water presently on Earth.

paganism has absolutely zero affiliation with science, and those that believe that, should stop reading blogs and stop watching Jesse Ventura on television.
superstitions are grossly worrying on this board.

also:besides the egyptians, having zero mention of any flood during this time, there is also zero evidence geologically to support a great flood at the time described in the bible.
There is also the fact that one man could not have physically traversed the entire world, and collected over millions of animals. If you believe he collected millions of animals, and set them on a gigantic boat, then I fear for genes, and do not think they should be passed on. SHOW ME EVIDENCE.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



Well I suppose the 'lunatic' is the one with no evidence or denying the evidence we have.

Yes Jesus was recorded by all the historians of the time. Not only Jesus but the surrounding events of his death on the cross, the apostles, and the early Christians.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."

[link to www.thedevineevidence.com]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]











The flood resulted in the entire sedimentary geocolumn full of dead and fossilized creatures, as expected. The global fossil record proves a global flood as fossils only form under such conditions. The geocolumn is then all interconnected by polystrate fossils proving it is the result of a single catastrophic event. The flood canyons have been repeated in a lab setting and published.

Egypt did not exist having been founded after the flood by the sons of Noah in the Land of Kish (Kish or Cush).

The water for this flood is found today in the oceans. The mountains were pushed up at the time as water jetted from the mid-atlantic ridge.

Most of this was already covered page 1 with links.

 Quoting: - 28711488


You are correct, most of this was already answered, and that which hasn't been can easily be obtained with a Google search. The main focus of the argument here should be that evolutionists don't believe their idiotic theory because it is better science, it is because they are willfully ignorant. They will continue to shift the burden of proof, attack the Bible with completely fabricated doctrine from the Zeitgeist films, make up a straw-man argument, and then declare themselves the winner of the debate. It is classic liberal technique. It is exactly what Satan did in the Garden of Eden "Yea, hath God said" (doubt) "Ye shall not surely die" (denial), "Ye shall be as gods" (deify). Evolution first casts doubt upon the Word, then outright denies it, and finally leaves men thinking they can become gods of their own destiny.
Like I said in an earlier reply, I know that no amount of evidence could ever persuade them. Their foolish hearts have become darkened and they would not accept the Truth, even if they could (which of course, they can not, unless God quickens them). I know this because I used to be there. I was raised a militant atheist for the first 19 years of my life. I remember my dad sitting me down when I was a young child and showing me "irrefutable proof" that we evolved from molecules through natural processes and that the age of the Earth was billions of years old; thus concluding that the Bible must be fictitious. The Holy Ghost is the only one that can open their eyes, ears and hearts, and no amount of argument, evidence, or willpower can change that. They do not deny God because of empirical reasoning; they deny God because of their fleshly lusts. It is a spiritual matter, not a scientific one.
Each and every one of us has a conscience that bears witness when we sin, because God has written the commandments on our hearts. The wall they are hiding behind is thin, fragile, and full of holes. There will be no excuses on the Day of Reckoning, for God has clearly revealed Himself to His creation. All things done in the dark will be brought into the light, and none will escape His wrath. Without the merciful, unmerited, unconditional forgiveness of the LORD and Saviour Jesus Christ of Nazareth testifying on their behalf, they will be condemned and forever cast into the Lake that burneth with fire and brimstone, originally created for Lucifer and his angels. May God have mercy on their self-righteous souls.
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot
yeah hmm. This sounds a lot like more blind faith, and opinion than evidence of any kind. You keep saying we won't listen to reason or believe facts presented. But you continually fail to produce any. Aside from one person who is not respected scientifically, yet calls himself a scientist. This is the evidence I won't listen to? This one man, who has been proven wrong? I present you with many men who've arrived at the same conclusion, you still have this one person, and the cult that backs it up. Because 1000 people believe one man does not make the one man any more correct. Being unable to establish proof, you resort to threats, threats of eternal fire. Where this fire is though, a mystery.
for your 'hell' is a place that not unlike most of what you believe resides in your imagination. Again, there's no evidence of hell. If you had many creationist scientists who've arrived at the same conclusion, you'd have a stronger case. But the blind faith from one or two men, is just illogical..
Still though, I await this mind changing evidence.
-
User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 04:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Do the Christians of this forum have an opinion on this? Its pretty controversial to confront Christian belief of creation. What about when its done by one of your own?

[link to www.huffingtonpost.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22256187



OP, simply Pat is often wrong, as with this when he claims the Bible is wrong about the age of the earth & creation.

Bible right again!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21689021
12/01/2012 04:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
This is very very simple folks....The earth as we know it can easily be only 6000 years old....ofcourse the materials and matter that it is made up of from space, could easily be billions of years old.With that said what good really is the dating process? Its not.Theres not a wrong answer here...all of them are the right answer you see.The earth is 6000 years old and it is also millions or billions or years old, depending how you look at it.Its both!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28864752



There is no evidence for billions of years once examined.
 Quoting: - 28711488


Closing your eyes and ignoring facts doesnt count as a lack of evidence, dont worry Kent Hovind will be out of jail in a few years to tell you more lies.
-
User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 04:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
The Evolution Delusion: The Young Earth


[link to www.youtube.com]
Malcolm Bowden presents the decrease in the Earth's magnetic field and the decrease in the size of the sun.

Research presented:

[link to www.icr.org]
[link to www.icr.org]
[link to www.icr.org]
-
User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 04:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Eroding ages
Dr Tasman Bruce Walker
Creationist Mechanical Engineer and Geologist

It was James Hutton, the Scottish physician-turned-geologist, who suggested in 1785 that the earth was immensely old. His famous assertion that there was ‘no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end’ paved the way for Darwin’s theory of evolution. Today most geologists take Hutton’s views for granted. Evolutionists generally accept that the continents formed at least 2.5 billion years ago.

These ideas are found to be wholly unconvincing once we take a closer look. We find that there are many geological processes that indicate the continents are not as old as evolutionists say. One such problem for the old-age idea is erosion. The continents cannot be billions of years old because they would have eroded away long ago. There should be nothing left.

Continents are young

The ‘slow and gradual’ story, suggested by the Scottish physician Hutton two hundred years ago, does not make sense. Old-earthers claim that the continents are over 2.5 billion years old, yet using their own assumptions, the continents should have eroded away in 10 million years. Note that this 10 million years is not the estimated age of the continents. Rather, it highlights the bankruptcy of uniformitarian ideas.

Geologists who believe the Bible consider that the mountains and continents we have today were formed as a consequence of the Flood of Noah’s day. When the continents were uplifted at the end of the Flood, the incredible energy of the retreating floodwaters carved the landscape. Not a lot, geologically speaking, has happened in the 4,500 years since then.
[link to creation.com]



Little Grand Canyon

[link to www.youtube.com]



101 other evidences

[link to creation.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 04:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Oh no man, they've got facts too! You know, that one creationist guy that got popular from being wrong by every one of his contemporaries. We are just not listening though, we should revere this man. I mean even though nobody with an above average iq does, we should. Hahahaha.
I guess there is no other evidence, and all we are going to get is "comets if rain", "Egypt didn't exist", and "you'll burneth in the fire". Your father was a smart man. Instead of trying to be rebellious, you should have been a better son. I'm actually jealous..my father believes bill o rielly to be god.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21689021
12/01/2012 04:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Eroding ages
Dr Tasman Bruce Walker
Creationist Mechanical Engineer and Geologist

It was James Hutton, the Scottish physician-turned-geologist, who suggested in 1785 that the earth was immensely old. His famous assertion that there was ‘no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end’ paved the way for Darwin’s theory of evolution. Today most geologists take Hutton’s views for granted. Evolutionists generally accept that the continents formed at least 2.5 billion years ago.

These ideas are found to be wholly unconvincing once we take a closer look. We find that there are many geological processes that indicate the continents are not as old as evolutionists say. One such problem for the old-age idea is erosion. The continents cannot be billions of years old because they would have eroded away long ago. There should be nothing left.

Continents are young

The ‘slow and gradual’ story, suggested by the Scottish physician Hutton two hundred years ago, does not make sense. Old-earthers claim that the continents are over 2.5 billion years old, yet using their own assumptions, the continents should have eroded away in 10 million years. Note that this 10 million years is not the estimated age of the continents. Rather, it highlights the bankruptcy of uniformitarian ideas.

Geologists who believe the Bible consider that the mountains and continents we have today were formed as a consequence of the Flood of Noah’s day. When the continents were uplifted at the end of the Flood, the incredible energy of the retreating floodwaters carved the landscape. Not a lot, geologically speaking, has happened in the 4,500 years since then.
[link to creation.com]



Little Grand Canyon

[link to www.youtube.com]



101 other evidences

[link to creation.com]
 Quoting: - 28711488


Tasman Bruce Walker was trying to make a quick buck from creationtards. His own dissertation says;

'The age of the complex is 225 +- 4 Ma. All members have the same age. The individual ages determined using the 40Ar/39Ar (224.2 +- 4.8 Ma) and the Rb-Sr (225.5 +- 2.3 Ma) methods are within error of each other and in remarkable agreement. The results also agree within error of the previous K-Ar determinations (Webb and McDougall, 1967).'

What do you think Ma stands for?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 04:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Eroding ages
Dr Tasman Bruce Walker
Creationist Mechanical Engineer and Geologist

It was James Hutton, the Scottish physician-turned-geologist, who suggested in 1785 that the earth was immensely old. His famous assertion that there was ‘no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end’ paved the way for Darwin’s theory of evolution. Today most geologists take Hutton’s views for granted. Evolutionists generally accept that the continents formed at least 2.5 billion years ago.

These ideas are found to be wholly unconvincing once we take a closer look. We find that there are many geological processes that indicate the continents are not as old as evolutionists say. One such problem for the old-age idea is erosion. The continents cannot be billions of years old because they would have eroded away long ago. There should be nothing left.

Continents are young

The ‘slow and gradual’ story, suggested by the Scottish physician Hutton two hundred years ago, does not make sense. Old-earthers claim that the continents are over 2.5 billion years old, yet using their own assumptions, the continents should have eroded away in 10 million years. Note that this 10 million years is not the estimated age of the continents. Rather, it highlights the bankruptcy of uniformitarian ideas.

Geologists who believe the Bible consider that the mountains and continents we have today were formed as a consequence of the Flood of Noah’s day. When the continents were uplifted at the end of the Flood, the incredible energy of the retreating floodwaters carved the landscape. Not a lot, geologically speaking, has happened in the 4,500 years since then.
[link to creation.com]



Little Grand Canyon

[link to www.youtube.com]



101 other evidences

[link to creation.com]
 Quoting: - 28711488


hahahahahah watch how REAL scientists break down this man. Quite pathetic. Real scientists find flaw in creationists every time they open their mouths. Not because they are hateful people, but because spreading wrong information to other people is fucking dangerous.
Anyway, here take a look how they eat him up and spit out all of his unture science. I love it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 04:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Sorry I was laughing so hard I forgot the link.

[link to www.noanswersingenesis.org.au]
-GLP-Christian-
Potential Terrorist

User ID: 26377887
Sweden
12/01/2012 04:59 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Well technically the earth is 5900+ something, not even 6000 yet, but close.

These evotards are just playing their circle reasoning games as always:
[link to trueorigin.org]

Evotards are the tards of the NWO.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26125917
United States
12/01/2012 05:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Anything on ICR or Answers in Genesis is irrelevant. The earth is at least 4.6 billion years old, and the dinosaurs were killed off 65 million years ago.
-GLP-Christian-
Potential Terrorist

User ID: 26377887
Sweden
12/01/2012 05:06 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
The only reason we are having this debate, is because Christianity survived despite it's bullshit origin, by way of brutal force, murder, execution, and manipulation.
Had men not had a reason for its survival, these stolen ideas would have never lasted this long and we would NOT be having this conversation at all...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



There were no borrowed stories in Christianity. Those recent claims from Freemason sources have been rejected by scholars and discredited or debunked by many others, time and again.

There has been no murder or forced manipulation from the Christians, quite the opposite. The Roman Church is responsible for their own war crimes, and Christians were the victims by the millions. Today the dark age evotard theories also come from the Jesuit's pagan roots.
 Quoting: - 28711488


Here we go. This reply scares me for many reasons. Here is the proof that is going to make you feel very stupid:

Could Jesus and Horus have been the same person or even the same God? Are the similarities just a coincidence? This is what I love about mythology, and if there was ever justification for my belief that Christianity is merely a revised version of Egyptian religion, I'd say this is it:

1. Both were conceived of a virgin.
2. Both were the "only begotten son" of a god (either Osiris or Yahweh)
3. Horus's mother was Meri, Jesus's mother was Mary.
4. Horus's foster father was called Jo-Seph, and Jesus's foster father was Joseph.
5. Both foster fathers were of royal descent.
6. Both were born in a cave (although sometimes Jesus is said to have been born in a stable).
7. Both had their coming announced to their mother by an angel.
8. Horus; birth was heralded by the star Sirius (the morning star). Jesus had his birth heralded by a star in the East (the sun rises in the East).
9. Ancient Egyptians celebrated the birth of Horus on December 21 (the Winter Solstice). Modern Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25.
10. Both births were announced by angels (this si nto the same as number 7).
11. Both had shepherds witnessing the birth.
12. Horus was visited at birth by "three solar deities" and Jesus was visited by "three wise men".
13. After the birth of Horus, Herut tried to have Horus murdered. After the birth of Jesus, Herod tried to have Jesus murdered.
14. To hide from Herut, the god That tells Isis, "Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child." To hide from Herod, an angel tells Joseph to "arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt."
15. When Horus came of age, he had a special ritual where hsi eye was restored. When Jesus (and other Jews) come of age, they have a special ritual called a Bar Mitzvah.
16. Both Horus and Jesus were 12 at this coming-of-age ritual.
17. Neither have any official recorded life histories between the ages of 12 and 30.
18. Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus. Jesus was baptized in the river Jordan.
19. Both were baptized at age 30.
20. Horus was baptized by Anup the Baptizer. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.
21. Both Anup and John were later beheaded.
22. Horus was taken from the desert of Amenta up a high mountain to be tempted by his arch-rival Set. Jesus was taken from the desert in Palestine up a high mountain to be tempted by his arch-rival Satan.
23. Both Horus and Jesus successfully resist this temptation.
24. Both have 12 disciples.
25. Both walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, and restored sight to the blind.
26. Horus "stilled the sea by his power." Jesus commanded the sea to be still by saying, "Peace, be still."
27. Horus raised his dead father (Osiris) from the grave. Jesus raised Lazarus from the grave. (Note the similarity in names when you say them out loud. Further, Osiris was also known as Asar, which is El-Asar in Hebrew, which is El-Asarus in Latin.)
28. Osiris was raised in the town of Anu. Lazarus was raised in Livanu (literally, "house of Anu").
29. Both gods delivered a Sermon on the Mount.
30. Both were crucified.
31. Both were crucified next to two thieves.
32. Both were buried in a tomb.
33. Horus was sent to Hell and resurrected in 3 days. Jesus was sent to Hell and came back "three days" later (although Friday night to Sunday morning is hardly three days).
34. Both had their resurrection announced by women.
35. Both are supposed to return for a 1000-year reign.
36. Horus is known as KRST, the anointed one. Jesus was known as the Christ (which means "anointed one").
37. Both Jesus and Horus have been called the good shepherd, the lamb of God, the bread of life, the son of man, the Word, the fisher, and the winnower.
38. Both are associated with the zodiac sign of Pisces (the fish).
39. Both are associated with the symbols of the fish, the beetle, the vine, and the shepherd's crook.
40. Horus was born in Anu ("the place of bread") and Jesus was born in Livlehem ("the house of bread").
41. "The infant Horus was carried out of Egypt to escape the wrath of Typhon. The infant Jesus was carried into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod. Concerning the infant Jesus, the New Testament states the following prophecy: 'Out of Egypt have I called my son.'" (See Point 13)
42. Both were transfigured on the mount.
43. The catacombs of Rome have pictures of the infant Horus being held by his mother, not unlike the modern-day images of "Madonna and Child."
44. Noted English author C. W. King says that both Isis and Mary are called "Immaculate".
45. Horus says: "Osiris, I am your son, come to glorify your soul, and to give you even more power." And Jesus says: "Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once."
46. Horus was identified with the Tau (cross).

I suppose documented facts about Horus, as well as many other important historical figures are the work of Freemasons. These paralleled are the same throughout many religions if you simply look, but you believe the accurate histories of other religions to be inaccurate. even though they predate yours? see the backwards logic in that?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577


Hey son of Satan, that's not true and you most likely know it, Ghandy and co. has been destroyed many times.

Was the story of Jesus stolen from that of the Egyptian deites Horus and Osiris?
[link to tektonics.org]

Now go away liar.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 05:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Ha. "Son of satan" clever. I'm offended! You could so better than that.
Did you google that link just now? I've seen it, and all the others posted by Christians. I've also read it from the source, and I can tell you for sure that this is no lie. These stories are repeated in most ancient religions. Yours just happens to be the newest. [link to www.noanswersingenesis.org.au] I'm really enjoying this site, it goes through all creationsist arguments and gives links to all the scientists that ha e proved them wrong. Good stuff. Didn't know it existed until now
Where did the son of the smart atheist go? Is he tired of defending creationism yet? Do they give you guys treats when life gets hard? Tell you its going to be okay? I'm not the son of Satan, don't believe in superstitious crap. I am also not held responsible for what I do by some illusion. Pretty liberating. I must say.
-GLP-Christian-
Potential Terrorist

User ID: 26377887
Sweden
12/01/2012 05:25 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Doubters don't bother to read the fact that the secular world all through out time has said the bible is the most accurate historical document ever written. It was also considered the best book for education for several thousand years. So...there was not enough arrogance to deny the bible for 5,800 years and then suddenly sin explodes in the world. Evolution gets pushed through. And then...suddenly...the attacks on the bible HAVE to come to justify the false beliefs being presented by a very small amount of people. The idea of NOT being held accountable for their sins attracts lots of people and they embraced a lie.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1615583


Well the time is short, tptb decided to create these atheist fags, they've been brainwashed to think they are superior in every way, when challenged they go on a murderous rampage, look at these proponents of this garbage in this thread, continually it's their opinions and circular reasoning that rules their thoughts.

They would be better off dead than to do what they now do because of their arrogance the indeed with be twice more the child of hell than those that made them into the children of hell, their teachers and mentors.

They've been given good answers yet they reject them, and there's more information out there:
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]

just pray God takes care of it, save or kill them.
Best if they get saved but I think most of them, they can't be saved, they've crossed the line already.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 05:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Well technically the earth is 5900+ something, not even 6000 yet, but close.

These evotards are just playing their circle reasoning games as always:
[link to trueorigin.org]

Evotards are the tards of the NWO.
 Quoting: -GLP-Christian-


You do realize that Sweden, is full of atheists? All of whom disagree with you? Something like 90% of your population thinks you're out of your mind for believing the words of an American creationist..one who is not even respected in America!!!
You can believe whatever you like, but if I were you I would
Feel lucky to be in Sweden. Were people are far more logical thinkers, and don't require superstition to get them through their day. It's all a crutch. Because some of us can't deal with the fact they are free. Don't know what to do with it. Those people are weak in my opinion. One you realize that you are not being judged, you'll be able to be a better person.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26125917
United States
12/01/2012 05:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
First, I'm not atheist.

What I am opposed to is bad science, which is what proponents of an earth that is no older than 6,000 years are peddling. In turn, that's based on a particular *interpretation* of scripture.

Is it any wonder that the United States have fallen so far behind in science?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 05:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Doubters don't bother to read the fact that the secular world all through out time has said the bible is the most accurate historical document ever written. It was also considered the best book for education for several thousand years. So...there was not enough arrogance to deny the bible for 5,800 years and then suddenly sin explodes in the world. Evolution gets pushed through. And then...suddenly...the attacks on the bible HAVE to come to justify the false beliefs being presented by a very small amount of people. The idea of NOT being held accountable for their sins attracts lots of people and they embraced a lie.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1615583


Well the time is short, tptb decided to create these atheist fags, they've been brainwashed to think they are superior in every way, when challenged they go on a murderous rampage, look at these proponents of this garbage in this thread, continually it's their opinions and circular reasoning that rules their thoughts.

They would be better off dead than to do what they now do because of their arrogance the indeed with be twice more the child of hell than those that made them into the children of hell, their teachers and mentors.

They've been given good answers yet they reject them, and there's more information out there:
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]
[link to www.christ-saviour.com]

just pray God takes care of it, save or kill them.
Best if they get saved but I think most of them, they can't be saved, they've crossed the line alreaydy.
 Quoting: -GLP-Christian-


You claim we are killers and such and then say that you think god should kill us? Do some homework. More people have died in the name of religion than any other reason. Religion is the form of control you're talking about and they are the murderers you fear. Murderous rampage? You must be referring to one case, I can do the same.

Inquisition.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2902812
United States
12/01/2012 05:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
What he's saying is that if you don't believe in a young earth, you
Created by tptb? (Whatever the hell that is) god should kill you, and you are brainwashed. This is what they all fall back to. Threats and paranoia.
Sorry person, but there's no powers that be creating people. Must be on the conpiracy website too long.

I'm not threatening you with being fed to the spaghetti monster,
Or saying religitards are being made in a church by pedo priests...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27499577
United States
12/01/2012 06:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Let's address you lunatics one by one.. with evidence.
because you need it badly.

"Have you heard of Jesus? He is a recorded fact by all the historians of the time. Jerusalem? Israel? Hebrews?"

There is a huge gap at the heart of the Jesus story. There is not one single piece of archaeological, forensic or documentary evidence that shows Jesus was ever alive. There is plenty of evidence that people believed that there was a man named Jesus who was killed, but none that he was alive. By that I mean nothing exists from the time of the supposed life of Jesus. No letters exist that mention Jesus the preacher or miracle worker. No Christian letters or diaries, no Jewish ones, no Greek ones, no Roman ones. Nobody wrote about a single aspect of his life while he was living it. Just think for a moment about what the man was supposed to have done. He was supposed to have had meetings with thousands of people. He was supposed to have cured people, even raised a man from the dead. He was supposed to have entered the city of Jerusalem at the head of a triumphal procession and yet nobody wrote anything about it at the time. Not a book, not a diary, not a graffito, not even a sale or return catering order for loaves and fishes. Isn't that just a little hard to believe?

in case you missed it, here is the math that directly proves the flood DID NOT HAPPEN:


How much water would it take?
The total volume of water on Earth is about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers www.space.com, USGS.gov

Volume of a sphere = 4/3 r3 where r=radius

Radius of Earth = 6,378.15 Kilometers

Height of Mt. Everest = 8.85 Kilometers

The volume of water needed to cover Earth to the height of Mt. Everest is approximately the difference in volume of a sphere needed to encompass Mt. Everest and the volume of a sphere the size of the Earth.

Volume of a sphere encompassing the Earth at sea level
= 4/3 (6,378.15 KM)3 = 1,086,825,918,019 KM3

Volume of a sphere encompassing Mt. Everest
= 4/3 (6,378.15 + 8.85 KM)3 = 1,091,388,460,971 KM3

The Difference = 4,530,488,766 KM3

Notice that this is more than 3 TIMES the amount of water presently on Earth.

paganism has absolutely zero affiliation with science, and those that believe that, should stop reading blogs and stop watching Jesse Ventura on television.
superstitions are grossly worrying on this board.

also:besides the egyptians, having zero mention of any flood during this time, there is also zero evidence geologically to support a great flood at the time described in the bible.
There is also the fact that one man could not have physically traversed the entire world, and collected over millions of animals. If you believe he collected millions of animals, and set them on a gigantic boat, then I fear for genes, and do not think they should be passed on. SHOW ME EVIDENCE.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



Well I suppose the 'lunatic' is the one with no evidence or denying the evidence we have.

Yes Jesus was recorded by all the historians of the time. Not only Jesus but the surrounding events of his death on the cross, the apostles, and the early Christians.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."

[link to www.thedevineevidence.com]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]











The flood resulted in the entire sedimentary geocolumn full of dead and fossilized creatures, as expected. The global fossil record proves a global flood as fossils only form under such conditions. The geocolumn is then all interconnected by polystrate fossils proving it is the result of a single catastrophic event. The flood canyons have been repeated in a lab setting and published.

Egypt did not exist having been founded after the flood by the sons of Noah in the Land of Kish (Kish or Cush).

The water for this flood is found today in the oceans. The mountains were pushed up at the time as water jetted from the mid-atlantic ridge.

Most of this was already covered page 1 with links.

 Quoting: - 28711488


I know this because I used to be there. I was raised a militant atheist for the first 19 years of my life. I remember my dad sitting me down when I was a young child and showing me "irrefutable proof" that we evolved from molecules through natural processes and that the age of the Earth was billions of years old; thus concluding that the Bible must be fictitious.
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot


It's usually the person of faith that become an atheist, I can't fathom what led you away from the truth, having been born into a household that supports science. I however strongly believe that it is dangerous to teach children anything about religion before they are ready to investigate on their own, it is however better to teach them all religions, and let them take it all in. You seem like an intelligent person, so I really can't figure out what changed your mind. Was it creationism? did you have a spiritual experience? I really can't fathom what would draw you towards creationism. The proponents of a young earth theory, some scientists, have been proved to be quacks, liars, and completely wrong. As an intelligent person I don't see why this. Isn't it the same thing as your father forcing these ideas on you, as creationists telling you what to believe? why believe anything at all. It's possible we are both wrong, but more possible I think that science has it somewhat correct. I'd like to know what did it for you though. Please don't run away from this thread, I'm not being malicious or rude in any way we are having a civil debate and i'm enjoying it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27499577
United States
12/01/2012 06:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Let's address you lunatics one by one.. with evidence.
because you need it badly.

"Have you heard of Jesus? He is a recorded fact by all the historians of the time. Jerusalem? Israel? Hebrews?"

There is a huge gap at the heart of the Jesus story. There is not one single piece of archaeological, forensic or documentary evidence that shows Jesus was ever alive. There is plenty of evidence that people believed that there was a man named Jesus who was killed, but none that he was alive. By that I mean nothing exists from the time of the supposed life of Jesus. No letters exist that mention Jesus the preacher or miracle worker. No Christian letters or diaries, no Jewish ones, no Greek ones, no Roman ones. Nobody wrote about a single aspect of his life while he was living it. Just think for a moment about what the man was supposed to have done. He was supposed to have had meetings with thousands of people. He was supposed to have cured people, even raised a man from the dead. He was supposed to have entered the city of Jerusalem at the head of a triumphal procession and yet nobody wrote anything about it at the time. Not a book, not a diary, not a graffito, not even a sale or return catering order for loaves and fishes. Isn't that just a little hard to believe?

in case you missed it, here is the math that directly proves the flood DID NOT HAPPEN:


How much water would it take?
The total volume of water on Earth is about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers www.space.com, USGS.gov

Volume of a sphere = 4/3 r3 where r=radius

Radius of Earth = 6,378.15 Kilometers

Height of Mt. Everest = 8.85 Kilometers

The volume of water needed to cover Earth to the height of Mt. Everest is approximately the difference in volume of a sphere needed to encompass Mt. Everest and the volume of a sphere the size of the Earth.

Volume of a sphere encompassing the Earth at sea level
= 4/3 (6,378.15 KM)3 = 1,086,825,918,019 KM3

Volume of a sphere encompassing Mt. Everest
= 4/3 (6,378.15 + 8.85 KM)3 = 1,091,388,460,971 KM3

The Difference = 4,530,488,766 KM3

Notice that this is more than 3 TIMES the amount of water presently on Earth.

paganism has absolutely zero affiliation with science, and those that believe that, should stop reading blogs and stop watching Jesse Ventura on television.
superstitions are grossly worrying on this board.

also:besides the egyptians, having zero mention of any flood during this time, there is also zero evidence geologically to support a great flood at the time described in the bible.
There is also the fact that one man could not have physically traversed the entire world, and collected over millions of animals. If you believe he collected millions of animals, and set them on a gigantic boat, then I fear for genes, and do not think they should be passed on. SHOW ME EVIDENCE.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



Well I suppose the 'lunatic' is the one with no evidence or denying the evidence we have.

Yes Jesus was recorded by all the historians of the time. Not only Jesus but the surrounding events of his death on the cross, the apostles, and the early Christians.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."

[link to www.thedevineevidence.com]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]











The flood resulted in the entire sedimentary geocolumn full of dead and fossilized creatures, as expected. The global fossil record proves a global flood as fossils only form under such conditions. The geocolumn is then all interconnected by polystrate fossils proving it is the result of a single catastrophic event. The flood canyons have been repeated in a lab setting and published.

Egypt did not exist having been founded after the flood by the sons of Noah in the Land of Kish (Kish or Cush).

The water for this flood is found today in the oceans. The mountains were pushed up at the time as water jetted from the mid-atlantic ridge.

Most of this was already covered page 1 with links.

 Quoting: - 28711488


I know this because I used to be there. I was raised a militant atheist for the first 19 years of my life. I remember my dad sitting me down when I was a young child and showing me "irrefutable proof" that we evolved from molecules through natural processes and that the age of the Earth was billions of years old; thus concluding that the Bible must be fictitious.
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot


It's usually the person of faith that become an atheist, I can't fathom what led you away from the truth, having been born into a household that supports science. I however strongly believe that it is dangerous to teach children anything about religion before they are ready to investigate on their own, it is however better to teach them all religions, and let them take it all in. You seem like an intelligent person, so I really can't figure out what changed your mind. Was it creationism? did you have a spiritual experience? I really can't fathom what would draw you towards creationism. The proponents of a young earth theory, some scientists, have been proved to be quacks, liars, and completely wrong. As an intelligent person I don't see why this. Isn't it the same thing as your father forcing these ideas on you, as creationists telling you what to believe? why believe anything at all. It's possible we are both wrong, but more possible I think that science has it somewhat correct. I'd like to know what did it for you though. Please don't run away from this thread, I'm not being malicious or rude in any way we are having a civil debate and i'm enjoying it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11705783
United States
12/01/2012 06:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Evotards are the tards of the NWO.
 Quoting: -GLP-Christian-

"...a book fell into my hands entituled Proofs of a Conspiracy by John Robison, which gives a full account of a society of Freemasons, that distinguishes itself by the name of Illuminati, whose plan is to overturn all government and all religion, even natural; and who endeavour to eradicate every idea of a supreme being, and distinguish man from beast by his shape only."

-Lutheran minister G.W. Snyder writing to U.S. President George Washington, August 22, 1798 [link to rotunda.upress.virginia.edu]
Klink

User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 06:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
First, I'm not atheist.

What I am opposed to is bad science, which is what proponents of an earth that is no older than 6,000 years are peddling. In turn, that's based on a particular *interpretation* of scripture.

Is it any wonder that the United States have fallen so far behind in science?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26125917



It is not based on any particular interpretation - it is what the Bible flat out says. You can reject what it says and try and harmonize your views with the world (Satan) but that will not change what is written. The "first day" was about 6000 years ago according to genealogies recorded for this very reason.

Visit creation.com where they pick apart the new dating methods falsely called 'science'.
Klink

User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 06:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Evotards are the tards of the NWO.
 Quoting: -GLP-Christian-

"...a book fell into my hands entituled Proofs of a Conspiracy by John Robison, which gives a full account of a society of Freemasons, that distinguishes itself by the name of Illuminati, whose plan is to overturn all government and all religion, even natural; and who endeavour to eradicate every idea of a supreme being, and distinguish man from beast by his shape only."

-Lutheran minister G.W. Snyder writing to U.S. President George Washington, August 22, 1798 [link to rotunda.upress.virginia.edu]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11705783



Free book: Darwin and the NWO

[link to www.creationism.org]
Klink

User ID: 28711488
United States
12/01/2012 07:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
It's usually the person of faith that become an atheist, I can't fathom what led you away from the truth, having been born into a household that supports science. I however strongly believe that it is dangerous to teach children anything about religion before they are ready to investigate on their own, it is however better to teach them all religions, and let them take it all in. You seem like an intelligent person, so I really can't figure out what changed your mind. Was it creationism? did you have a spiritual experience? I really can't fathom what would draw you towards creationism. The proponents of a young earth theory, some scientists, have been proved to be quacks, liars, and completely wrong. As an intelligent person I don't see why this. Isn't it the same thing as your father forcing these ideas on you, as creationists telling you what to believe? why believe anything at all. It's possible we are both wrong, but more possible I think that science has it somewhat correct. I'd like to know what did it for you though. Please don't run away from this thread, I'm not being malicious or rude in any way we are having a civil debate and i'm enjoying it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



I wouldnt have called myself an atheist but when I began going to church and studying these issues I did hold the belief that we came from the apes and the earth was billions of years old. Where I got that from was the schools and Hollywood movies, Discovery Channel, ect. Only after being exposed to a different view critical of the evolution theories can one compare them and make an informed choice.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12790821
United States
12/01/2012 07:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Damn. I can't believe it's 2012, almost 2013, and people are still talking about this shit?

What? Next are you going to tell me that the earth is a flat disc in the center of the universe?

These efforts at continuing to force bronze age ideology down modern throats are just ridiculous. Most of you don't even know how ridiculous you sound.

The planet is about 4.5 billion years old. The bible is fiction. God probably doesn't exist. There certainly isn't any evidence for it outside the various religious texts, all of which rely on themselves for validation.
UnmannedAerialPilot

User ID: 27573455
United States
12/01/2012 07:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Let's address you lunatics one by one.. with evidence.
because you need it badly.

"Have you heard of Jesus? He is a recorded fact by all the historians of the time. Jerusalem? Israel? Hebrews?"

There is a huge gap at the heart of the Jesus story. There is not one single piece of archaeological, forensic or documentary evidence that shows Jesus was ever alive. There is plenty of evidence that people believed that there was a man named Jesus who was killed, but none that he was alive. By that I mean nothing exists from the time of the supposed life of Jesus. No letters exist that mention Jesus the preacher or miracle worker. No Christian letters or diaries, no Jewish ones, no Greek ones, no Roman ones. Nobody wrote about a single aspect of his life while he was living it. Just think for a moment about what the man was supposed to have done. He was supposed to have had meetings with thousands of people. He was supposed to have cured people, even raised a man from the dead. He was supposed to have entered the city of Jerusalem at the head of a triumphal procession and yet nobody wrote anything about it at the time. Not a book, not a diary, not a graffito, not even a sale or return catering order for loaves and fishes. Isn't that just a little hard to believe?

in case you missed it, here is the math that directly proves the flood DID NOT HAPPEN:


How much water would it take?
The total volume of water on Earth is about 1.4 billion cubic kilometers www.space.com, USGS.gov

Volume of a sphere = 4/3 r3 where r=radius

Radius of Earth = 6,378.15 Kilometers

Height of Mt. Everest = 8.85 Kilometers

The volume of water needed to cover Earth to the height of Mt. Everest is approximately the difference in volume of a sphere needed to encompass Mt. Everest and the volume of a sphere the size of the Earth.

Volume of a sphere encompassing the Earth at sea level
= 4/3 (6,378.15 KM)3 = 1,086,825,918,019 KM3

Volume of a sphere encompassing Mt. Everest
= 4/3 (6,378.15 + 8.85 KM)3 = 1,091,388,460,971 KM3

The Difference = 4,530,488,766 KM3

Notice that this is more than 3 TIMES the amount of water presently on Earth.

paganism has absolutely zero affiliation with science, and those that believe that, should stop reading blogs and stop watching Jesse Ventura on television.
superstitions are grossly worrying on this board.

also:besides the egyptians, having zero mention of any flood during this time, there is also zero evidence geologically to support a great flood at the time described in the bible.
There is also the fact that one man could not have physically traversed the entire world, and collected over millions of animals. If you believe he collected millions of animals, and set them on a gigantic boat, then I fear for genes, and do not think they should be passed on. SHOW ME EVIDENCE.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577



Well I suppose the 'lunatic' is the one with no evidence or denying the evidence we have.

Yes Jesus was recorded by all the historians of the time. Not only Jesus but the surrounding events of his death on the cross, the apostles, and the early Christians.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."

[link to www.thedevineevidence.com]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]











The flood resulted in the entire sedimentary geocolumn full of dead and fossilized creatures, as expected. The global fossil record proves a global flood as fossils only form under such conditions. The geocolumn is then all interconnected by polystrate fossils proving it is the result of a single catastrophic event. The flood canyons have been repeated in a lab setting and published.

Egypt did not exist having been founded after the flood by the sons of Noah in the Land of Kish (Kish or Cush).

The water for this flood is found today in the oceans. The mountains were pushed up at the time as water jetted from the mid-atlantic ridge.

Most of this was already covered page 1 with links.

 Quoting: - 28711488


I know this because I used to be there. I was raised a militant atheist for the first 19 years of my life. I remember my dad sitting me down when I was a young child and showing me "irrefutable proof" that we evolved from molecules through natural processes and that the age of the Earth was billions of years old; thus concluding that the Bible must be fictitious.
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot


It's usually the person of faith that become an atheist, I can't fathom what led you away from the truth, having been born into a household that supports science. I however strongly believe that it is dangerous to teach children anything about religion before they are ready to investigate on their own, it is however better to teach them all religions, and let them take it all in. You seem like an intelligent person, so I really can't figure out what changed your mind. Was it creationism? did you have a spiritual experience? I really can't fathom what would draw you towards creationism. The proponents of a young earth theory, some scientists, have been proved to be quacks, liars, and completely wrong. As an intelligent person I don't see why this. Isn't it the same thing as your father forcing these ideas on you, as creationists telling you what to believe? why believe anything at all. It's possible we are both wrong, but more possible I think that science has it somewhat correct. I'd like to know what did it for you though. Please don't run away from this thread, I'm not being malicious or rude in any way we are having a civil debate and i'm enjoying it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577


Not running away at all, I have a wife, 5 kids, chickens, goats, etc. and am a busy man. Every time evidence is presented, it is simply met with ad hominem attack, or dismissed with a flippant "that's not true", without of any kind of actual scientific refutation. Similar to you claiming we cannot point to the Bible as a source of evidence, then turning around and appealing to authority with "all scientists believe this" argumentation. The difference there being that Creationists appeal to Biblical authority, which we believe originates with God, while Evolutionists appeal to the fallible authority of man, which originates in our corrupt minds.

In answer to your sincere question: No, it wasn't Creationism that changed my mind. As I have clearly stated, man in his natural state cannot understand the things of God. They are foolishness to him, as the Bible reveals, most assuredly. It is only by a direct quickening of the spirit of a man, by the Holy Ghost, that a man can come to a saving knowledge of God. It is never a "choose Jesus" situation, which is unfortunately what most of modern day Christianity teaches. Faith comes only by God's will, God's work in man, and God's timing. No one "chooses" God, He chooses them (or rather chose).

That being said, God chose me. Before the foundations of the world were laid, I was His. The Great Potter has chosen some vessels for honor, and some for dishonor. His children were chosen that He might display His grace (unmerited favor), mercy, and forgiveness. The rest were created to display the contrast, and help us realize how grateful we should truly be. Let me be clear; none of us deserve to go to Heaven. None. We are all wicked sinners, Hell-bent on Hell-fire, the only difference being that God has chosen some of us to display His mercy towards. Those whom He has chosen, He gives new life. It is the "re-birth" experience, that I am sure you have heard of. Now, I know it is an appalling thought; that God has created some souls just to destroy, in order to display His goodness to others for not destroying them, but who are we to question the Creator? It is His universe. He made it how He wanted it. The Bible puts it this way:

"14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" -Romans 9

I seemingly digress, but I cannot tell you in such a simple answer, and for that I do apologize. Getting back to the question, yes I had a "spiritual" experience. To put it bluntly: I met my Creator, and His name is Jesus Christ of Nazareth. My conversion story is quite interesting, even doubters have told me how perplexing it is, if only for the purpose of their entertainment on my behalf. I don't mind at all, I just know what happened to me, what has happened since, and that I am certain, willing-to-go-to-the-grave-for-it certain, that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant, inspired Word of the Living God. I "converted", "was born-again", "found God', "got religion", whatever you want to call it on 9/11/2001, at around 4 am, before the attacks. A girl that is now my wife, which was an on-again-off-again relationship at the time, led me to the LORD that night (or morning rather). I will save you the details because I will assuredly be digressing at that point, and besides I am going to be typing the whole thing out in a thread very shortly. It is a good one though, if only for your entertainment and to get a chance to laugh at us "ignorant" believers. I can assure you that you will not be disappointed and I will let you know when I post it.

Getting back to your question and fast forwarding through me becoming a Christian: I realized that the Theory of Evolution, as I was taught it, was not compatible with the Bible. At this point now, I knew the Bible was true. I believed Evolution to be fact, but I now knew from first-hand experience, the validity of the Bible. Having this knowledge, I began researching the Creation/Evolution debate with renewed vigor, but from a different vantage point. I began learning about the lies that had been forced upon me by my state-sponsored education and family, and was blown away by how easily manipulated I was. I was shocked to find that the vast majority of "evidence" shown to me in the textbooks to support the theory was fraudulent, and most of it had been debunked many years before it was taught to me. I began researching more and more and became quite knowledgeable on the subject and enjoy talking about it. Seeing things from a different perspective, I now realize how brainwashed I was back then, and why the majority of state-educated people buy into this sham. Once you get someone "off track", it is very easy to keep them there, and very difficult for them to get back on track. That is the very definition of our education system (and most of the world's for that matter). Propaganda at a young age, reinforced with fraudulent data that will fill in the gaps at a later age, appealing to authority to seal the deal. It is perhaps the greatest hoax ever perpetrated upon humanity. I know full well that the odds of someone being converted to Christianity because of the Creation/Evolution debate are very slim, but because of my past, and the way it affected every facet of my thinking, I just feel compelled to proclaim the truth of what I have learned, wherever I go. That is a very long winded answer to your rather short and simple questions, haha. I do apologize, but like I said, it is difficult for me to just answer it as simply as it was asked. hf
God Loves ALL

User ID: 24314824
United States
12/01/2012 07:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Damn. I can't believe it's 2012, almost 2013, and people are still talking about this shit?

What? Next are you going to tell me that the earth is a flat disc in the center of the universe?

These efforts at continuing to force bronze age ideology down modern throats are just ridiculous. Most of you don't even know how ridiculous you sound.

The planet is about 4.5 billion years old. The bible is fiction. God probably doesn't exist. There certainly isn't any evidence for it outside the various religious texts, all of which rely on themselves for validation.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12790821


well earth isn't, but there is a flat disk at the center of the creation. It's called the paradise Isle. I am beginning to moderately cover it here: Thread: Teaching by Candace/God Loves All (Page 2)

Earth is way on the outside edge of the superuniverse.
The actual Lord's Prayer Given by Jesus 2000 years ago.

"MY SPIRIT, YOU ARE OMNIPOTENT. YOUR NAME IS HOLY. MAY YOUR REALM BE INCARNATE IN ME. MAY YOUR POWER REVEAL ITSELF WITHIN ME, ON EARTH AND IN THE HEAVEN. GIVE ME TODAY MY DAILY BREAD, AND THUS, LET ME RECOGNIZE MY TRANSGRESSIONS AND ERRORS, AND I SHALL RECOGNIZE THE TRUTH. AND DO NOT LEAD ME INTO TEMPTATION AND CONFUSION, BUT DELIVER ME FROM ERROR. FOR YOURS IS THE REALM WITHIN ME AND THE POWER AND THE KNOWLEDGE FOREVER,
AMEN.

Nice video: [link to www.youtube.com] Make this World a Better One

Thread: Walter Russell Quotes Walter Russell thread
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 904314
Canada
12/01/2012 08:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
Plus it should be pointed out that "genesis" is not actually about the creation of the earth, this is just a metaphor

hiding
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27499577
United States
12/01/2012 08:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The earth is NOT 6000 years old.
...



Well I suppose the 'lunatic' is the one with no evidence or denying the evidence we have.

Yes Jesus was recorded by all the historians of the time. Not only Jesus but the surrounding events of his death on the cross, the apostles, and the early Christians.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."

[link to www.thedevineevidence.com]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]











The flood resulted in the entire sedimentary geocolumn full of dead and fossilized creatures, as expected. The global fossil record proves a global flood as fossils only form under such conditions. The geocolumn is then all interconnected by polystrate fossils proving it is the result of a single catastrophic event. The flood canyons have been repeated in a lab setting and published.

Egypt did not exist having been founded after the flood by the sons of Noah in the Land of Kish (Kish or Cush).

The water for this flood is found today in the oceans. The mountains were pushed up at the time as water jetted from the mid-atlantic ridge.

Most of this was already covered page 1 with links.

 Quoting: - 28711488


I know this because I used to be there. I was raised a militant atheist for the first 19 years of my life. I remember my dad sitting me down when I was a young child and showing me "irrefutable proof" that we evolved from molecules through natural processes and that the age of the Earth was billions of years old; thus concluding that the Bible must be fictitious.
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot


It's usually the person of faith that become an atheist, I can't fathom what led you away from the truth, having been born into a household that supports science. I however strongly believe that it is dangerous to teach children anything about religion before they are ready to investigate on their own, it is however better to teach them all religions, and let them take it all in. You seem like an intelligent person, so I really can't figure out what changed your mind. Was it creationism? did you have a spiritual experience? I really can't fathom what would draw you towards creationism. The proponents of a young earth theory, some scientists, have been proved to be quacks, liars, and completely wrong. As an intelligent person I don't see why this. Isn't it the same thing as your father forcing these ideas on you, as creationists telling you what to believe? why believe anything at all. It's possible we are both wrong, but more possible I think that science has it somewhat correct. I'd like to know what did it for you though. Please don't run away from this thread, I'm not being malicious or rude in any way we are having a civil debate and i'm enjoying it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27499577


Not running away at all, I have a wife, 5 kids, chickens, goats, etc. and am a busy man. Every time evidence is presented, it is simply met with ad hominem attack, or dismissed with a flippant "that's not true", without of any kind of actual scientific refutation. Similar to you claiming we cannot point to the Bible as a source of evidence, then turning around and appealing to authority with "all scientists believe this" argumentation. The difference there being that Creationists appeal to Biblical authority, which we believe originates with God, while Evolutionists appeal to the fallible authority of man, which originates in our corrupt minds.

In answer to your sincere question: No, it wasn't Creationism that changed my mind. As I have clearly stated, man in his natural state cannot understand the things of God. They are foolishness to him, as the Bible reveals, most assuredly. It is only by a direct quickening of the spirit of a man, by the Holy Ghost, that a man can come to a saving knowledge of God. It is never a "choose Jesus" situation, which is unfortunately what most of modern day Christianity teaches. Faith comes only by God's will, God's work in man, and God's timing. No one "chooses" God, He chooses them (or rather chose).

That being said, God chose me. Before the foundations of the world were laid, I was His. The Great Potter has chosen some vessels for honor, and some for dishonor. His children were chosen that He might display His grace (unmerited favor), mercy, and forgiveness. The rest were created to display the contrast, and help us realize how grateful we should truly be. Let me be clear; none of us deserve to go to Heaven. None. We are all wicked sinners, Hell-bent on Hell-fire, the only difference being that God has chosen some of us to display His mercy towards. Those whom He has chosen, He gives new life. It is the "re-birth" experience, that I am sure you have heard of. Now, I know it is an appalling thought; that God has created some souls just to destroy, in order to display His goodness to others for not destroying them, but who are we to question the Creator? It is His universe. He made it how He wanted it. The Bible puts it this way:

"14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" -Romans 9

I seemingly digress, but I cannot tell you in such a simple answer, and for that I do apologize. Getting back to the question, yes I had a "spiritual" experience. To put it bluntly: I met my Creator, and His name is Jesus Christ of Nazareth. My conversion story is quite interesting, even doubters have told me how perplexing it is, if only for the purpose of their entertainment on my behalf. I don't mind at all, I just know what happened to me, what has happened since, and that I am certain, willing-to-go-to-the-grave-for-it certain, that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant, inspired Word of the Living God. I "converted", "was born-again", "found God', "got religion", whatever you want to call it on 9/11/2001, at around 4 am, before the attacks. A girl that is now my wife, which was an on-again-off-again relationship at the time, led me to the LORD that night (or morning rather). I will save you the details because I will assuredly be digressing at that point, and besides I am going to be typing the whole thing out in a thread very shortly. It is a good one though, if only for your entertainment and to get a chance to laugh at us "ignorant" believers. I can assure you that you will not be disappointed and I will let you know when I post it.

Getting back to your question and fast forwarding through me becoming a Christian: I realized that the Theory of Evolution, as I was taught it, was not compatible with the Bible. At this point now, I knew the Bible was true. I believed Evolution to be fact, but I now knew from first-hand experience, the validity of the Bible. Having this knowledge, I began researching the Creation/Evolution debate with renewed vigor, but from a different vantage point. I began learning about the lies that had been forced upon me by my state-sponsored education and family, and was blown away by how easily manipulated I was. I was shocked to find that the vast majority of "evidence" shown to me in the textbooks to support the theory was fraudulent, and most of it had been debunked many years before it was taught to me. I began researching more and more and became quite knowledgeable on the subject and enjoy talking about it. Seeing things from a different perspective, I now realize how brainwashed I was back then, and why the majority of state-educated people buy into this sham. Once you get someone "off track", it is very easy to keep them there, and very difficult for them to get back on track. That is the very definition of our education system (and most of the world's for that matter). Propaganda at a young age, reinforced with fraudulent data that will fill in the gaps at a later age, appealing to authority to seal the deal. It is perhaps the greatest hoax ever perpetrated upon humanity. I know full well that the odds of someone being converted to Christianity because of the Creation/Evolution debate are very slim, but because of my past, and the way it affected every facet of my thinking, I just feel compelled to proclaim the truth of what I have learned, wherever I go. That is a very long winded answer to your rather short and simple questions, haha. I do apologize, but like I said, it is difficult for me to just answer it as simply as it was asked. hf
 Quoting: UnmannedAerialPilot


I've basically dismissed the other creationists in this thread, and focused more so on you. I had a feeling we were around the same age, and I don't know if you've been reading some of the other replies, but when 'freemasons', satanism, and 'TPTB' begin ending up in people's comments, I tend to stop reading entirely. I respect your story, and as much as I feel you are wrong, I know that you feel the same way. I was stressing the fact that experiments have been done to disprove the young world theory, and inversely, whether you'd like to admit or not, proponents of this theory are not well liked, or respected in most of the world of science. This is where my argument would eventually always come back to. I have indeed read your links, and heard the arguments for and against, and made a personal choice to believe in what I feel is most logical. Perhaps there are such things as spiritual awakenings, and though i'm almost certain that I will never have one, I do not for a minute though, feel the need to claim that yours is all in your head, or merely the amalgamation of events culminating in what one might describe as religious experience. The beauty of personal truths, is that they are personal, while they may be only singular, and shouldn't be used to change anyone's mind. The things I feel the need to stress the most are what I feel are dangerous, while I may my own opinion of what is dangerous, my fear of creationism is real, and at this point should be understood why that fear exists. As i've said, I feel the evidence for an old world is far greater than a young one. maybe that will change someday, perhaps we will find proof of the infallibility of the bible, while I don't think that will happen, I do however want answers, and having this answer be the correct one is fine with me. The push for creationism in the education system, I think is a just one, but not at this point. As I've said I don't feel like the evidence is there for it, and honestly see the work of creation based scientists as pseudo-science. You can understand having once held these beliefs, why this idea is dangerous to me. It feels a lot like a cop out, a way of halting exploration and experimentation. Much as I understand the world to be before the age of enlightenment. I do not want to make anyone an atheist, or present things that untrue to reach that goal, As I don't feel that should be the intention of anyone who believes in god. People should reach their own personal truth. You appear to be more civil than most people i've encountered while on this message board, which isn't long. this is why i've been eager to keep this thread going. Originally my intentions were to simply present the things that I feel best refute a young world, and I feel like there is enough of it to do that easily. Things however can get out of control quickly, as history has shown us, when people are discussing their beliefs. I respect your beliefs, as you should mine. None of what I say should translate as an attack on your character or to cause harm in a malicious manner. After reviewing the latest creationist arguments, I do not feel as though they've gained any resonance with me, to the contrary, it feels more now like they are grasping at straws. as with the link i've posted to personal and professional attack on the creationist scientist mentioned earlier, I wasn't aware of this site before, and i'm not sure those who run the site, but it would appear that they've posed some pretty compelling arguments against the creationist theories. It's far too easy to do a simple search and find numerous sites where creationism is not only not widely accepted, but looked at as almost harmful to what the general scientific population hold true. I truly do not think that the majority of scientists are captive inside a conspiracy to undermine the bible, or creationism at all. I feel like it's more likely that they present their findings and let people decide for themselves. I feel like I must repeat that i've read everyone's links, and do not agree that they are accurate in their findings, whereas I find many respected people of esteem who agree, that some of their reasoning, math, and science are honestly just made up, or completely inaccurate.
I'm going to reread your post, and get a better idea of what you were saying about your experience, as I do find it interesting, and like I said, I respect your opinion, and am enjoying this debate very much. Do let me know when you post it in its entirety. thanks.

News