Lesson 9/16: The Appearance of Age

What if God created the earth recently, but made it look billions of years old? Is this a test of our faith? Is this an effective way to deal with the overwhelming scientific evidence of earth's antiquity, or does it only raise more serious scientific and theological questions?

Category:

Education

Tags:

• creation
• faith
• science
• evolution
• gordon
• glover
• beyond
• firmament
• bible
• young
• earth
• creationism
• appearence
• of
• age
• ex
• nihilo
• big
• bang
• miracles
• theology

[Omnitrix12]

And another point. In the case of the wine, it is worth noting that Jesus did not make aged wine, just very high-quality wine. A human analyzing the wine would, however, perceive the high quality and all factors contributing to it as designators of age, when in reality they meant something quite different. So what I'd like to know is, how can we be sure that things like distant starlight are not in fact telling us something totally different from what we think?

[glovergj]

we can't be sure. but evidence suggest that the best explanation is that these object are reall are as far away (and as old) as they appear.

[Omnitrix12]

As it stands right now, yes.

[glovergj]

Science should always be preceded with the phrase: "as it stands now" because anything can be wrong.

[updownleftrightinout]

It seems to me that you fully understand how bad folk-science is creating a new generation of potential atheists. Sometimes the evidence is so overwhelming that even the most devout will be swayed because the contradicions side so heavily AGAINST christian folk-science.

It is a crisis and the harder creationists push to deny the hard science, the harder the backlash will be among their own ilk. Atheists just have to sit back and watch the carnage among believers who convert away from faith.

[Dchellberg]

Why waste all this effort, it was very nicely done by the way. Just imagine what you could accomplish with reality. Just realize the Biblical Jesus was probably just a myth. The Bible sure reads like he was. Why not just accept that there is no evidence that your God or any other exists. Then you do not have to do all of this mental gymnastics to try to make sense of the senseless.

[richardaberdeen]

@Omnitrix12 Thus, Jesus is the founder of human rights, because he's the only one who laid it down as the foundation for all that matters. Unfortunately, our children today are taught to get good grades so they can get a scholarship so they can go to college so they can earn more money, a very ignorant and wrong reason for teaching a child to be educated. Anything that is not based on treating others like we want to be treated is anti-Christ, anti-human rights, against our own flesh and blood.

[richardaberdeen]

@Omnitrix12 Human rights are as old as civilization itself, being based on our shared human conscience, which is what the Bible claims is true and what is clearly demonstrated in the historical record, where an almost identical "golden rule" pops up in a great many diverse often non-connected cultures. However only Jesus stated that treating others as we want them to treat us "is the law and the prophets", which in our society is like saying, the sum of all wisdom, morality, science & education

[Omnitrix12]

@richardaberdeen Fair enough.

[Omnitrix12]

@richardaberdeen Actually, there were some definite notions of human rights as early as Moses. Not the extent that exists today, perhaps, but it was there.

And records would, in fact, prove your suggestion wrong. The Bible. a contemporary work of Jesus' time, has proven accurate on many occasions. In fact, many who try to disprove it have become Christians in the end.

[richardaberdeen]

@Omnitrix12 I was just stating the historical reality, as very few either Christians or non-Christians are aware of it. In 1st Century Palestine, there were two different methods of tracing genealogies; one tracing through a direct husband only, while the other included brothers who raised up offspring for a deceased brother and also sometimes included females and others, which is why there are discrepencies between Matthew and Luke.

[richardaberdeen]

@Omnitrix12 There is no evidence that Jesus is the founder of Christianity or any other religion. Jesus is the founder of human rights, which the true Messiah by definition, would be. There isn't remotely anything in common between Jesus and Christianity, which arose after 90 AD, when all of his original followers were gone.

[Omnitrix12]

@richardaberdeen Really? So religious truth doesn't have to be historically sound? Well in that case why don't we throw out Moses and Elijah too?

[Omnitrix12]

@richardaberdeen Concerning the dual recorded ancestries of Jesus, are you agreeing or disagreeing?

Let me be clear: I have never doubted in words or in heart that Jesus was immaculately concieved and virgin born. Because He was a genetic descendant of David through Mary, He had a hereditary right to be king. Through Joseph's line, He had the legal right, although the line had been disrupted so that a biological son of Joseph would, by God's own decree, been barred from the throne.