Oh, yes. Many conservative, Bible-based, born-again Christians believe that -- and that something came from nothing. My former church teaches that to this day.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
|
Oh, yes. Many conservative, Bible-based, born-again Christians believe that -- and that something came from nothing. My former church teaches that to this day.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
Then that's a first. There is no such documentation in the bible that states the earth was created in 7 days. Must be a different bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Genesis 1 if taken literally, Creation was everything from nothing and in six 24-hour days -- and God rested on the 7th day.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
Yep. Didn't take 7 days at all. It fits with what science is pushing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
God took a nap on Day Seven.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
There is nothing that says they were 24 hour days as we know them. On the first day the sun did not exist so there was nothing to divide day from night and allow the measurement of time as we know it. The only reason we talk about days is the word day is used.. We need to understand that Scripture is on a need to know basis. We are told the essentials of what we need to know. If Moses hadn't made reference to days we would not be questioning the length of a day.There was creation, it didn't happen all at once, there were successive events which brought us to the point where man existed on the Earth. Nothing in that has been refuted by science and the sequence of events seems to be supported by scientific study even if there is a great deal more detail than the Scripture offersQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
But, like I said, many fundamentalist and conservative church bodies interpret Genesis 1 literally -- a day = 24 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Observing the formation of other galaxies suggests that planets form around a star and not the other way around so where does that fall with let there be light?
Planets get their orbit around a central point. Usually the largest mass in the area. That is where gravitational attraction comes in. Then if that point gets hot enough it can come to life as a star. Most of everything is believed to have been started from gas and formed other compounds in the process and some of those compounds come from the creation of stars that have lived through their cycle and explode.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I think it fits perfectly, we have the idea of the big bang or the universe springing into existence and with the growing number of stars etc, light in abundance. In what way is this inconsistent?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The idea that we understand planetary formation and the process that God used to bring about the final result are an idea of man. The idea that there was only one solar system was an idea of man. The idea of an Earth centred universe was an idea of man, subsequently shown to be error in the science of the time. God never said Earth was the only place he created life, but what he has spoken of is specific to Earth or the universe seen from Earth. You have to remember that all those galaxys and very far distant objects are as they once existed, not as they do exist. It's like digging up a dinosaur, it is a view of a distant past
I suppose God could handle it, He is God after all. Regardless, it's this ridiculous meme that religious people are anti-science intellectual lightweights that's the real myth. Religion and science are not mutually exclusive, people of faith are responsible for some of the greatest scientific discoveries in history and are the foundation of our educational system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
You must not hang out with the intellectual lightweight churchgoers. Trust me, they're out there and have been for years. I grew up listening to them trying to refute evolution -- "God made the Grand Canyon that way" and "The Earth is 6,000-10,000 years old" and "The flood in Genesis 7 covered the entire Earth" and "Satan put fossils there to fool people and test our faith."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again, Steve:You keep saying this, but it doesn't make sense to me...Quote:
Religion and science are not mutually exclusive, people of faith are responsible for some of the greatest scientific discoveries in history and are the foundation of our educational system.
Look. I know there are Christians who are also scientists... There are also Christians who think the biblical story is a parable and NOT to be taken literally... It's THAT kind of Christian who could, and does, make great scientific discoveries...
But, I'm not convinced that a person who has the CREDENTIALS of a scientist, and the BELIEFS of a fundamentalist, would EVER undertake a scientific experiment that COULD invalidate his fundamentalist belief. I just don't believe he would.
You do?
Excon
I never said they weren't out there, that doesn't make us all stupid for believing in God.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I know some of those fundamentalists, but even they go to the doctor. The point is it's time to drop this Christians are idiots meme.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
This seems like the appropriate place for this since environmentalism is the religion of choice on the left.
Dominion Virginia Power won’t build offshore wind farm on tract it leased unless cost drops
That's right, they made big news for their big offshore lease but won't do much because wind is too expensive.
Well now, that won't do will it?Quote:
Dominion’s own 15-year projections, in its Integrated Resource Plan filed with the state, show Virginians getting no electric power from offshore wind.
“Actual construction of such facilities must await technological advances that would reduce costs,” the plan says.
Well then, I recommend Tidwell spend his money and build the wind farm. That's the problem with you worshipers of the planet, instead of jumping on the bandwagon of natural gas which IS clean burning, has reduced emissions and has been the biggest bright spot in this stagnant economy you'd rather force a business to invest in a losing proposition and survive on magic fairy dust while whacking thousands of innocent - protected - birds in the process to press onward with your predetermined green jobs of the future.Quote:
Instead, the company foresees increasing its reliance on fossil fuels, primarily natural gas. That would miss an excellent opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to help slow global warming. It would also pass up an early chance to commit to a promising new industry with potential to create thousands of jobs.
Here’s the problem with Dominion’s analysis: It looks only at the costs in dollars and cents. By that measure, admittedly, offshore wind is currently about three times as expensive as natural gas.
But Dominion’s bookkeeping doesn’t take into account the health and environmental costs of continuing to rely on fossil fuel.
“Asthma for kids, acid raid, smog, sea level rise, shoreline retreat in Hampton Roads, none of that shows on your Dominion Power bill. If it did, we’d be building offshore and onshore wind turbines as fast as we could,” said Mike Tidwell, director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network.
I have news for you, it ain't going to happen by legislation and intimidation. You aren't going to get there as long as you stand in the way of a robust economy which is exactly what you need to get the technology and innovation you want.
I don't know many Christians that will say the earth is more than 6,000 years old. They insist you have to believe in evolution and no God if you believe the gap theory or anything similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
don't worry ;Darwinists have reasonable explanations to explain the lack of fossil records and that time gap thingy
Hello tom:
You DIDN'T learn that in science class. You learned it in CHURCH, which is where you're SUPPOSED to learn it.
If the teachers taught Creationism like THAT, you'd come out of that class BELIEVING you could create a rocket ship if you PRAYED hard enough... Otherwise, what would be the POINT of teaching them fundamentalist crap like that?
You DO want them to BELIEVE it, don't you. You DO know that IF they believe it, they'll NEVER build rocket ships.. They'll go into the science of gay repairative technology..
Bwa, ha ha ha ha.
excon
I never said ID was science. You say Darwinism is science even though it has more holes in it than swiss cheese . If your idea of science is Darwinism is fact then folks like you would not get off the ground. By the way ;building a rocket ship is an engineering feat .
Yes in the end even Darwin said he was wrong, pity he wasn't more precise or scientific in that statement. Evolution is theory, AGW is theoryQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
That's one of those urban myths:Quote:
Yes in the end even Darwin said he was wrong
Darwin
Wow, you used Answersingenesis as a reliable source?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Darwin was well and healthy when he spoke of concerns about the lack of transitional fossils which would've proved his hypothesis .He hoped in the future that some would be found. But that never happened
Steve,
Is it not a good explanation?
You can try:
Deathbed conversion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Or
Inquiring Minds Newsletter
Or
John van Wyhe explodes some myths about Darwin | Science | The Guardian
I'm not the one who put the myth out there, just surprised you would give that group any credibility, them being a leading proponent of creationism and all.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
So if they say it's a myth it's a pretty good chance it is. ;-)Quote:
them being a leading proponent of creationism and all.
Oh dear.. that's funny. :DQuote:
Science and the Bible
The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible.
Is this a push to replace science books in schools with the bible?
You could do worse but of course you would be a little lacking on detail but some interesting experiments could be heldQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Healing
Speaking to rocks
Parting seas
Walking on water
Stopping time
Fighting battles with musicians
All of which proves you have to have God with you if you are going to do these things
There is a place for both, it is the exclusion of one in favour of the other that is the evilQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Would you feel the same if it was a bible from another religion? There are many you know.
I'm not against the study of comparative religion as long as none are deliberately excluded.
It too is in the category of there are alternative views. You see evolution is an alternative view and should be taught in comparative religion
Except that by definition religions are based on faith whereas evolution is based on observable facts.Quote:
You see evolution is an alternative view and should be taught in comparative religion
Evolution is as much based on faith as any religion since its central tenents remain unprovenQuote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I guess everything is faith to you, facts can be discarded.
I'm waiting for the facts to be presented
Education is a good start.
The article is not accurate in a couple of areas in relation to the Big Bang. Firstly, the theory itself doesn't say anything about a single point in the universe where the Big Bang occurred.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Secondly, the theory does explain why there is a uniform temperature. The"lack of time" idea is bound up in the so called, "inflationary period" of expansion.
The other point worth mentioning is that evolution of the universe and biological evolution are not the same subject matter. In other words, the methodology used in biological evolution can not be used when trying to explain the evolution of the universe.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:01 AM. |