View Full Version : Why should anyone believe in the bible?
Jun 12th, 2003, 10:17 PM
The Bible is the foundation of everything conservative Christians believe about spiritual and ethical issues. But what do you say when your somewhat skeptical Uncle Harry says, "Why do you trust the Bible, anyway?"
It's a good question! And here's a suggested answer.
You can calmly tell Uncle Harry, a smart person who deserves an explanation, "Well, let me give you two reasons. First, I'm convinced that the New Testament account of what happened regarding Jesus Christ is factual history. And second, the Old Testament predictions about Christ were fulfilled in a way that could not be coincidence or clever deception. Only God could have arranged it."
In fact, the Bible itself is the source of this concise, powerful response.
Peter, one of Jesus' apostles, wrote: "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Peter 1:16, NIV). He also wrote: "And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as a light shining in a dark place" (2 Peter 2:19).
Let's look at these two areas in a little more depth.
REASON #1: THE NEW TESTAMENT ACCOUNTS OF CHRIST ARE RELIABLE HISTORY
First, the Gospel writers themselves said they were writing history---not fables, symbols or parables. In addition to the statement by Peter already quoted, Luke begins his Gospel by saying he "carefully investigated" the facts, probably interviewing multiple sources and eyewitnesses (Luke 1:1-4). John, referring to himself, says that he "testifies to these things...and wrote them down" (John 21:24) and that his account of Christ is what "we have seen with our eyes....we have seen it and testify to it" (1 John 1:1-2). And the apostle Paul, a converted skeptic, bolsters his defense of the physical, historical resurrection of Christ with numerous eyewitness accounts (1 Corinthians 15:1-:cool: .
Some skeptics say Christianity was invented as an ethical, "feel good" religion with little basis in "supernatural" fact. If so, then whoever wrote the New Testament was a gang of forgers whose lies contradicted their own ethical preaching---preaching in which truth and honesty were the most highly prized virtues. This is unlikely. Also, if the apostles were liars then all of them must have died knowing what they were dying for was a hoax, since all were martyred. This, too, is a stretch.
Second, standard historical criteria applied to the New Testament documents date them extremely close to the events they record. They date earlier, and with hundreds of more early manuscripts, than any accounts of any other ancient event. Huge portions are also quoted and cited by writers who lived close to that time.
That's hard to ignore. If you discount the factual historicity of the New Testament accounts of Christ's resurrection, then to be consistent you must blithely toss away all other accepted ancient histories and abandon all long-held methods of historical research.
Third, the accounts of Christ's resurrection caused the explosive growth of Christianity in an environment where, if false, they could easily have been refuted by Christianity's determined opponents---the Jewish leaders who had him executed. Christians made a highly sensational and easily refutable claim, yet no refutation was produced to kill the movement. Why? Because the claims were obviously factual to tens of thousands living in the time and vicinity of the events in question.
Fourth, key parts of the New Testament, including the life of Christ, are corroborated by non-Christian historians living during that period, including the Romans Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger, and by the Jewish historian Josephus.
Fifth, the four Gospels harmonize and complement each other in a way that rings true as history. Alleged "contradictions," which are very few, have been thoroughly explained through linguistic, logical, and textual analysis.
Sixth, the accounts include data that, frankly, are embarrassing to early Christian leaders---including Peter's repeated blunders and his denial of Christ during Jesus' trial. Would fakers have deliberately published material that made their leaders look foolish? This is powerful evidence that the Gospels are history, not propaganda.
Some say, "Extraordinary claims, such as Christ's miracles and resurrection, require extraordinary evidence." And that is exactly my point: the New Testament is extraordinary evidence. Christian faith is an informed faith.
REASON #2: FULFILLED PROPHECY PROVES THE BIBLE
Have almost anyone sit in a chair. Read them the fifteen verses from Isaiah 52:13 through 53:12, without telling them the source. Then ask them, "What famous historical figure does this describe?" Most will say, "Jesus Christ, of course." And most will be surprised to learn that the account is from the Old Testament, written over 600 years before Christ was born!
This passage contains at least thirty points of correspondence to the career of Christ. All are highly precise. All are highly improbable to be applicable to any one person. Yet they all apply to Christ, and Christ alone, exactly.
Skeptics once maintained that such prophetic scriptures must have been written after Christ. Modern archeological discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls have shattered such notions. Some skeptics today say that early Christian deceivers rewrote the life of Christ to fit such prophecies. Yet, as stated above, such attacks on New Testament authenticity mutilate an honest analysis of the known facts.
And the Isaiah passage is only the beginning. There are more than 300 Old Testament prophecies about Christ which, especially taken together, are convincingly on target.
ULTIMATE ANSWERS These are objective answers you can give. If the Bible is right about Jesus, it is a trustworthy document for other issues. Ultimately, there is a third reason you can bring up: your own testimony of how you came to trust Christ, and the resulting forgiveness of sins and new birth you experienced.
Uncle Harry's eternal decision is up to him, of course. But you will have the joy of knowing that when asked to "give an answer" (1 Peter 3:15), you had one.
Jun 13th, 2003, 11:38 AM
It seems to me the whole crux of the Bible is the resurrection of Jesus. If that is shown to be true, then it ends the whole debate. If not, then the prophecies argument is void too because he did not fulfill the most important one.
However IMHO the evidence is extremely patchy. Jesus just disappears after his resurrection, after seeing only a few people. We have no primary sources at all on the resurrection; none of the gospel writers had met Jesus. If I'd been resurrected then I'd have made sure it went down in the records. The earliest Gospels were written decades after Jesus.
Here's an alternative explanation of the Jesus story. A man realised how crap the world was and thought it would be much better if he could get people to love and respect each other. To add some weight to his arguments he claimed to be the fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy, so that people would listen to him. After convincing thousands of people with his brilliant teachings he was unsurprisingly executed by the Romans. His followers, desperate that his message should not be forgotten, told everyone that he had come back to life. This was so important to them they were prepared to die for it. This spread the message of Christianity to the world.
Unlikely? More so that a man being resurrected?
You can't say it was possible for Jesus to be resurrected because he was the son of God, as proven by the fact he was resurrected.
Jun 14th, 2003, 9:06 AM
You cant use the source to prove the source juggs. the actual history in the bible is often over hundreds of years out of place. Saying that aspects of the old testament predicted aspects of the new testament is like saying certain parts of star wars 1 predicted certain parts of star wars 4, while both my be true it doesnt mean that they prove anyhting other than that somebody wrote the second with the first in mind.
Jun 14th, 2003, 6:33 PM
Did you know it is recorded in the bible that the earth stood still for a day? And now it has been scientifically proven to be true?
Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel and he said in the sight of Israe,
Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themseves upon their enemies.
Jun 14th, 2003, 7:52 PM
That has neither been proven scientifically, nor is it even feasible. Its a huge blunder to say so. The earths rotation is slowing, it never stood still. Please dont say stuff that makes me want to ignore you.
Jun 15th, 2003, 3:32 PM
klaatu barada nikto:smokin:
Jun 15th, 2003, 7:18 PM
okay, okay so it hasn't been proven ( that I know of anyway)
Fact is, it's in the bible, so it IS true....and one day you WILL know the truth......
man some people are so grouchy!!!!
Jun 15th, 2003, 8:22 PM
actually, the bible said that the sun and the moon stood still, and that the earth is flat, and that the stars are fixed to the firm dome that seperates flat earth from heaven. The bible says a lot of stuff sp50, it says a lot of stuff that is obviously not true. dont state idiocies as facts eh.
Jun 16th, 2003, 8:20 PM
The earth is flat? Is that just because satan took Jesus in the air and told Him He could have all the kingdoms of the earth, and just because he could see the '4 corners' that ment they were 4 corners of a square? Maybe He floated around and there were north,east,west, and south. When did it say the moon stood still. Yes the sun stood still. Theres a little thing called 'frame of reference' To the guy who told the sun to stand still, it did, thats not to say the sun revolves around the earth. But to him it looked as though the sun stopped. Which maybe it did, but Im not sure since its fairly obvious we are rotating around it, even thought we ARE the center of the universe, fact is, where ever you were in the universe would seem like the center to you anyway. But to get back on topic, to HIM it looked as though the sun stopped moving. Which it did to him, even though I guess the earth stopped moving, or maybe thousands of years ago we had one of those things where mars came so close to us it slowed our orbit. I was reading about something happening with mars very close to earth thousands of years ago in ancient civilizations, though it may be just a legend made up by those cultures. Just a speculation I thought Id add.
When did it say the starts are fixed in a flat dome? How can you have a flat dome, you make no sense. And so I would think you just read up OTHER peoples interpretations of the Bible on the internet who try to prove it has many falicies, which it does not.
I read a site you or Mike posted a while back, and the first thing I noticed was the wrongness in one of the statements. He said there were 2 different creation accounts. I picked up the Bible, took a look, and well well, the second creation took place in front of Adam in the garden of eden. Who knows why, maybe it was to show adam that God made everything and could create things at will. I guess this part belongs in the 'falacies in the Bible section' but oh well, I just posted this small comment here.
Jun 16th, 2003, 11:36 PM
A dome cant be flat your are right, but if you look again at my post- unedited- i wrote firm dome.
In the passage sp50 posted it said the sun and the moon stood still- read what i am responding to before you go and type something stupid. Mars does not stop earths rotation, and if for some reason earths rotations ever did stop it would mean certain death for everything on the planet.
There are 2 different creation accounts. There are 2 contridictory accounts on who came first: adam or both adam and eve. unless you are traveling west at over 1000 miles an hour the sun will never stand still in your perspective.
Back when the bible was written it was beleived that the earth was the center of the universe and that it was flat and the the stars were fixed to the FIRM dome that seperates us from heaven. You know less about your beliefs than i do.
Jun 17th, 2003, 12:01 PM
AO, its kinda hard to fulfill about 600 prophecies in one man, the odds would like picking up a phone, dialing random numbers and reaching the pope without his actual number.I am glad it makes you stop and think though. You got a great site, and I enjoy returning to it even when I am told that I am a simpleton for believing in God. Keep up the good work.
DBA, I ain't going to waste my time anymore. Star Wars? do you know all of the prophecies concerning Jesus? There about 1000, and about 600 fulfilled with His Life, death and Resurrection. How about Israel? I bet you side with Hamas, cause it is easier to hate God's People than to do the decent thing and back them. By your own words, you don't believe in Israel, nor its people , because they are in the bible. I m not going to mention things happening today because you will say, and I quote, "Those scriptures are so archaic they can mean anything." even when they reference places and events by name. Why should I bother trying to have civilized conversation with you anymore. You blame God for evil things out of one side of your mouth, and deny His existance from the other side. You won't even try to see things from the other point of view, you are so afraid of being wrong it's sickening. Call what you want, I don't care, if it'll make you feel better. I prefer to discuss these matters with people who have open minds. I have a healthy respect for science and love to debate it, I don't deny it as being false. just cause it can't explain certain things doesn't mean its completely wrong. Same thing goes for my Lord and Savior. Don't like it? Tough.
Jun 17th, 2003, 12:24 PM
Yes i do compare the bible to starwars, even though starwars is a much better series. I never called the scriptures archiac- yet- so DO NOT put words in my mouth. I never said that the bible doesnt have the names of some places right, just that there are no fulfilled profecies about those places. I deny the existance of YOUR god and if YOUR god exists then it is to blame for everything, dont try to rewrite my views into what your church has taught you to beleive about me. The resuraction of bible character jesus is ONLY supported by the bible- NO OTHER EVIDENCE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. True it supposedly had a place it happened and that is a real place. but the events did not happen. I tried for a long time to see things from your point of view, unlike you though quesstions kept popping into my mind and i wanted them answered. No answers ever came. Why? They couldnt. You cant say a that a proficy in one half of a book is fulfilled by events that happen in the other half of it. well, you cant say thats its fulfilled anywhere but in the other half of the book. With 600 to chose from you would think you could come up with something that actually happened, something that has been proven. But you know what, you cant even prove there was an actual jesus so how could you possibly prove the fairytale accounts of his supposed life.
When i talk of god add 'if there is' to everything i say about it. I do this in my head and would assume that you do it to when you read my posts about it but it seems you are still hooked on the idea that everyone believes in your god.
Hmm, afraid to have an open minded conversation with me. You sound just like the clergy or anybody else who has made a living out of bible thumping. I know its hard to have a real conversation about the bible when people bring real questions to it.
It is Tough,
Jun 18th, 2003, 7:36 PM
The FIRMAMENT!, not the FIRM DOME!, and the firmament was what seperated the outer space heaven from the heaven here on earth. There were, or are 3 heavens, the earth , the sky, and my guess is outer space? Read the King James, and NO THERE ARE NOT 2 DIFFERENT CREATION ACCOUNTS, man you make up A LOT of lies for a person who claims to be educated person. Stop reading some bogus links on the internet that you believe automatically. Look up the work faith if you ever have time, I think its Hebrews 11:1, or was it 1:11.
Evidence in the world? They say they may have found the estuary that contained Jesus's brother, saw it on discovery channel a while back. And hey, who else in the world would have made a text history about Him other than Christians. I am fairly sure Ive heard talk about Pontius the roman emperer at the time in his region, who crucified Him, BUT, why would Pontius or the romans ever right anything about a theif, or a measly, 'King of the Jews'.
Whats your evidence? That we came from monkies that came from a fish that came from amino acids in a watery soup that came from a few elements?
I know that my Belief in Christ, is much better than your goddess of chance, namely: Evolution. Dont question me on it, you know my stand, you read my posts previously in the other debate on it.
Jun 18th, 2003, 9:19 PM
God creates animals and then man - Gen 1:25-26
God creates man and then the animals - Gen 2:18-19
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
Genesis 2:18,23 "And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. . . . And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
tell me how this isnt a direct contridiction.
Calling me a lyer? You refuse to beleive in facts! I have no questions of you, you couldnt possibly answer any questions i have. youre just not smart enough.
Like i said in my other posts though you are good for a laugh.
Jun 19th, 2003, 11:49 PM
I need a response to this
Jun 24th, 2003, 8:56 PM
GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.
GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.
GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.
GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.
GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.
Jun 25th, 2003, 2:30 PM
I have responded to this before (except quote one), it is very simple, as you are a simple minded person I will try to explain simply...
God created the world, he made light, where there was light there was no darkness, why do we need the sun if we have light already? Light was created before the sun.
The next three, if you read the Bible which you said you did, but I know you are lying, well you may have glanced through but not at all in order. If you accually read the first 5 pages of the Bile you would understand why. I will break the news to you know as Im sure you will say 'Alan you are a bigot! That means I can sit here and call you that and do nothing' as you have done before.
To anwser.... GOD MADE THE WORLD'S CREATURES FIRST ALL AROUND PLANTS AND ANIMALS GOD MADE ALL AROUND THE EARTH. Ok seems right, well to you its not because when God made EDEN the place for MAN He made all the things AFTER He had made man. To an internet website in your mind this is contradictory. IF you read the Bible yourself youd know. God made man in the garden of Eden, after that He created everything in front of him so he could name it, so in the garden things were put in a different order, even though everything around the world was already made.
Now the last quote.
You are a liar, well maybe not, but your of low intelligence to quote things even though they arnt in the Bible.
I took out the YE OLDE KING JAMES BIBLE, and some other new one just to make sure, and in line 1:26-27 it says nothing of them being created at the same time. It just says God made them male and female. In the garden he BROUGHT the man who He had made and placed him there, and with a rib created his wife.
Note: Lamark's theory of aquired characteristics is proven wrong even here. After God made man he took one of his ribs and made eve. That is why we today have the same number of ribs as women and not one less.
There you go *pondering as to what DBA rude comback will be this time*
Jun 25th, 2003, 2:38 PM
Just a quick point about the ribs:
If you take one out of a women, do you think her children would have one less? I think the rather better explanation is that Bible writers noticed men hae one fewer rib and tried to explain it.
Jun 25th, 2003, 3:14 PM
What is your motive to arguing the bible? You post scriptures, but have no understanding of them. Even the devil knows all the words in the Bible, but he does not understand it. It was hidden FOR us, not from us.
It is as if you have nothing better to do, than try to stir up "stuff" with your uneducated ideas about biblical things.
Either you are for God or against Him.....there is no in between. It is your life, both temporal and eternal.....you can do whatever you choose. I for one, would prefer you give your heart to the Lord and quit WASTING time ( because our time is almost up)
If you think by your ignorant arguments, you can make a Christian question their beliefs, then you know NOTHING about Christianity.
Jun 25th, 2003, 3:23 PM
Yah yah, close enough Mike, but come on, about 2000 or 4000 bc they just made up the Bible and decided to go along with a few things that explained where we came from? Cmon man, how can you think such a book was just made up by people to make the world better? Well I guess you can, were all intiteled to what we believe in...
Jun 25th, 2003, 3:53 PM
So the first ones is something like eden came after earth? Well, i guess that helps to rationalize the obviously flawed bible, or bile as you prefer to call it.
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
Genesis 2:18,23 "And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. . . . And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
This is in the bible. again you called me a liar.:evil:
fix that for me alan, and dont change the words.
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>If you accually read the first 5 pages of the Bile you would understand why.[/quote]
But i just cant stand bile alan.:evil:
about the sun and light. The sun creates light alan, This is a fact. Without the sun there can be no light from the sun. We also need the sun for many other reasons than just light. As for my IQ, its ......... well i dont want to embarrass you so lets just say its high.:evil:
SP50 I know i cant make someone throw away what they have been indoctrinated with. But those that are slowly starting to see things on their own might see some of my questions and realize they are valid. Im only trying to bring people to the light that is within them bud.
The bible was made up to keep people in line.8o
Jun 25th, 2003, 3:53 PM
I'm not saying the whole Bible was just made up, clearly many of the places and events did really happen. However nothing could ever convince me that God made the world in 7 days 4 thousand years ago. Creation is to me (and 99.5% of Christians in my country) just an attempt to explain the world to the people. Why would people believe a religion that could not explain where we came from?
Similarly, lots of other things in the Bible are not facts, jsut attempted explanations. You may also be interested to know that for thousands of years the Bible was not written down but passed on by word of mouth. Lots of potential for change from the original.
Jun 25th, 2003, 4:12 PM
:lol: I don't know where you DBA & AO........but you are sadly misinformed.....God created the earth, man etc in 6 days....on the 7th day He rested. I have heard the theory that when Jesus was born the earth was 4000 years old then........But I am quite sure the earth ( now) is a bit older than 4000 years old. The Word was written over time, starting with OT writers to NT testament writers. It was man's hand that wrote the words, but the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
In all this time, neither man or science has beed able to discredit the Holy Bible.....they can't because the Bible is the Word of God.......truth in it's fullness.
Men of great minds and IQ have tried for years to prove the Bible is false......and here you guys are trying???? :lol:
You can talk yourselves blue in the face, but it will do you no good!!!! The bible and all that is in it is truth! Even archeology is proving the bible true.
Jun 25th, 2003, 4:31 PM
sorry sp50 but not a single field of science has yet to do anyhting but discredit the bible. archeology disproves it with every fossil found seeing as how it takes millions of years for a carcuss to turn to stone. btw creationsism is not a scientific field. people with high IQ's have more than proven the bible wrong, but only other people with high IQ's canf understand it...... well lamens could to but ignorance is bliss.
according to your bible jesus was born 4000 years after creation which is why many beleive the earth is only 6000 years old. Too bad dinosaurs existed millions of years before the earth did eh. otherwise they might not be extinct.:evil:
Jun 25th, 2003, 8:20 PM
yeah, well you have proven something.....you would argue with a tree stump and tell it, it isn't wood!!!!!!
PS: carbon dating has been proven WRONG!!!!!!!!!1
Jun 25th, 2003, 9:05 PM
carbon dating has been proven unreliable with certain samples. it has by no means been proven wrong. There are certain areas which scientists know give bad samples for carbon dating, but just because your pasture read in some fundie news letter that its been proven wrong does not make him right at all. radioactive decay is something we observe, its not something that can be wrong.
P.S. Is the tree stump petrified?
Jun 26th, 2003, 1:32 AM
SP50 I think it's fair to say the scientific evidence is better than dinosaurs existed than that carbon-dating is completely inaccurate.
And if dinosaurs (and all the billions of other prehistoric animals) existed then the world simply cannot be 6,000 years old.
Jun 26th, 2003, 9:24 AM
:lol: You guys will believe fallible man ( scientists) before you will believe the one who created you ( God almighty)
Well here is some science to chew on
"Coal: Evidence for a Young Earth"
Evolutionary theory requires millions of years in the formation of coal in order to afford time for the development of living organisms whose fossils are found in coal deposits. However, laboratory and field research has demonstrated that coal is formed rapidly and in vast quantities. These vast coal deposits are unsullied by other material. The conclusion is drawn that actual research indicates a young age to the Earth that contains such coalified materials.
"If coal takes millions and millions of years of heat and pressure to form, how is it possible that creationists are teaching that the earth is only a few thousand years old?" This is a commonly asked question among individuals seeking answers about the age of the earth and the universe. Research has been done by several creation organizations, as well as independent scientists, in order to answer such questions. The evidence actually shows that coal does not take millions of years to form, as is commonly asserted. In fact, the formation of coal has been proven to be a rapid process that can be duplicated in modern laboratories in a matter of days - or even hours.
I. Rapid Formation
In order for coal to be formed, several factors must be present. Pressure, temperature, water, time, and some sort of vegetation are the key elements for the formation of coal. According to evolutionary theory, the slow accumulation and decomposition of vegetation living in past ages accounts for the coal seams. However, this theory can not answer why such large amounts of original vegetation without soil can be found in the areas that are now coal seams, or how these coal seams became so thick - some being over two hundred feet in depth.
Scientist Robert Gentry analyzed coalified wood found on the Colorado Plateau in order to determine how long it took for coal to form.1 By treating coal with epoxy and slicing it into thin sheets, Dr. Gentry was able to examine tiny, compressed radiohalos found in the coal. Radiohalos are discolorations in the coal, ejected by radioactive elements in the centers (such as uranium).
According to evolutionary theory, in order for these halos to form, several processes must have occurred. First, water-saturated logs must have been laid down in several different geologic formations, including the Triassic, Jurassic and Eocene layers. Later, uranium solutions infiltrated the water-saturated logs, and uranium decay products were collected at tiny sites within the logs. The radioactive decay from the tiny particles ejected spherical radiation damage regions around those sites, thus producing halos. Finally, a pressure event on the site of the formations compressed the logs as well as the radioactive halos within them. However, because coal is not a malleable substance, scientists know that these logs had not turned to coal at the time the compression event occurred. This points to a quick burial and coalification of the logs – rather than a long time period.2
II. Decay Ratios
When the ratio of uranium decay to its decay product (lead) is analyzed, the conclusion is drawn that all the logs within the various geologic formations were buried at the same time. The high lead-to-uranium ratios admit the possibility that both the initial uranium infiltration and the coalification could possibly have occurred within the past several thousand years.3
III. Polystrate Fossils
The presence of "polystrate" trees (trees petrified or coalified in an upright position) point to a rapid coalification process. One of the most commonly known polystrate trees is found at Katherine Hill Bay, Australia. This fossilized tree can be seen extending over twelve feet, through several sedimentary layers. According to evolutionary theory the different sedimentary layers took hundreds of thousands of years to accumulate. However, we know this is impossible since the tree would have decomposed long before the sediments would have had time to accumulate. Rather, this tree is testimony to the catastrophic and rapid burial that must have taken place.
IV. Unsullied Deposits
Finally, coal seams such as those found in the Powder River Basin of Gillette, Wyoming, ranging from 150 to 200 feet in depth, point to a rapid coalification process. "These coal seams run remarkably thick and unsullied by other material. Usually, unwanted sediments, such as clay, washes over a deposit before coal seams can get very thick. This leaves scientists with the baffling question of how the seams get so massive and still remain undiluted by influxes of clay and other impurities before they thicken."4
The answer can be found in the Biblical account of Noah's Flood. The Biblical description of the fountains of the great deep breaking up gives strong reference to volcanic activity in the pre-Flood basins.5 This would have provided several of the key factors need for the production of coal, along with an explanation of how the process could have occurred at such a rapid pace.
Although the coalification process has been used in the past to support theories of an aged universe, research done by leading creation scientists reveals that this process actually supports creation teachings of a young Earth. Physical evidence demonstrates that the coalification process must have occurred rapidly, rather than over vast time periods.
CEM Staff Writer
<a href="http://creationevidence.org/scientific_evid/coal/se_coal.html" target="top"> http://creationevidence.org/scientific_evid/coal/se_coal.html</a>
Jun 26th, 2003, 12:22 PM
I believe my intelligence and reason instead of an ancient book.
The whole idea is clearly ridiculous, as you would have realised if you'd thought about it. Just because someone writes some pseudo-science on a website doesn't mean it's accurate.
Polystrate trees: (a particularly bad creation argument)
Part of the problem is that creationists havn't read what geologists say about the formation of sediments. They interpolate that since geologists say it takes millions of years to form a cliff that they must think it must take hundreds of thousands of years to cover a tree.
Depositation does not happen at a uniform rate at all: an event like a levee breach could cause a huge amount of mud to cover a tree. Then, nothing may happen for hundreds of thousands of years.
Arguments like this one show the creation "scientists" haven't bothered to check even basic facts and really undermine their credibility.
Scientists can produce coal in short times in labs - using extremely high pressure and temperature. Under much lower temperatures it'll obvious like millions of times longer.
I assume you haven't read about Robert Gentry, the scientist you quote (seemingly without irony given the top of your post). This was the genius who came up with New Redshift Interpretation. You haven't mentioned this but I'll describe it here to show just how implausible these "creation scientists" are:
NRI describes a universe created a few thousand years ago. The Hubble Constant shows that galaxies are moving away from us at a speed proportional to their distance from us. The only way his model explains this is by every galaxy being given a velocity proportional to distance at the start of the universe, just to give the impression that we are part of an expanding universe. Also without the nuclear reactions happening shortly after a "big bang" where why are there so many light elements? Coincidence again? He most laughably tries to explain cosmic radiation away by "a layer of hydrogen surrounding the observable universe". Why God put that there no-one knows. It also apparently completely contradicts Einstein but I don't know enough physics to understand exactly how. I can find plenty of sites if you're interested. Anyway the point is that Gentry, like most Creationists, doesn't have a clue about science.
I'll respond to the other points if you're interested.
And you still haven't explained the dinosaurs to me...
Jun 26th, 2003, 3:31 PM
I am tired of explaining...... your intelligence and reason will not<strong> save</strong> you when the end comes.......and it will whether in death or before.
It's your choice.....I am tired of this.
I could show evidence, even fact, but still you would find something wrong with it by reason of you <em>intelligence and reason</em>
I would rather, better yet God would rather, you would give it up and submit to Him so that you might have everlasting life, but it's up to you.
I am sure some other sucker will come along that you can banter with.
Jun 26th, 2003, 5:49 PM
You need to give up your brain to beleive in sp50's god. Her god wants you to submit your thought and get faith in return. All her evidence is wrong when you use your intelligence Mike, how could you?:evil:
first off, creationists are not scientists, and creation institutes dont conduct expirements. calling a creationist a scientist is laughable.:evil: see just like the little face.
Jun 27th, 2003, 1:34 AM
SP50 surely you beleive God gave me a brain to think. If he wanted a world of blind faith he could have created one, but no he made one where we can think and question the judgements and beliefs of others.
If you don't want a scientific argument about creation don't make scientific posts and don't quote creation scientists.
I want the truth, just like you.
Jun 27th, 2003, 9:57 AM
The only TRUTH is in God and His Holy Word.
Jun 27th, 2003, 12:46 PM
hmmmm, how can darkness expose light????it can't... light exposes darkness.
Job 18:5 Yea the light of the wicked shall be put out and the spark of his fire shall not shine
6. The light shall be dark in his tabernacle and his candle shall put out with him
7. The steps of his strength shall be straitened(restricted, distressed) and his own counsel shall cast him down.
8. For he is cast into a net by his own feet, and he walketh upon a snare.
Jun 27th, 2003, 3:18 PM
Some editted lines from The Matrix (with religion replacing 'the Matrix')
"Religion is the wool that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth"
"That you are a slave."
How do you know what you believe is the truth, SP50? Why are you right and not the Muslims, Sikhs, Jews or Buddhists? They have beliefs just as strong as your own.
Jun 27th, 2003, 8:46 PM
Dan 12:10 Many shall be purified and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand
Jun 28th, 2003, 9:16 AM
Light doesnt expose darkness it can only expose things. Dark is a state not a thing.
Jun 28th, 2003, 12:10 PM
Dark is absence of light
Jun 28th, 2003, 4:37 PM
Light is used as an analogy to explain knowledge, when there is truth then there is light and when there is misunderstanding there is darkness. The light going on exposes everything (snares,pitfalls and obstacles) but as long as knowledge is controlled there is darkness. Knowledge, Wisdom and Reason are the conquerors of darkness and faith leads unto the Truth but blindness remains blindness.
Sandy you use well the words but do you understand the significance?
The Pharisees understood only the teachings of their fathers and were kept in the dark. When the truth through the light of Christ shone upon them, they refused to see it and were blind and deaf. Mike uses his knowledge and reason to see that God has presented to mankind that things do evolve. There is even evolution in religion and the ones that refuse to change are known as Dinosaurs. Let me tell you a little about the Jewosaurus, the Christianosaurus, the Muslimosaurus and all the other Dinosaurs of Religion. They were once mighty dwellers of the Earth but because they refused to adapt to the changing environment of Earth they became extinct. The Jewosaurus was a huge physical being that lumbered along on tradition and paid no heed to the changes God was creating. Its armour was weak and it was destroyed by it's enemies. The Christianosaurus was a beautiful majestic creature that was overcome by a hardening of the heart and died of Heartfailure. The Muslimosaurus was a justifiably large creature that suffered from a split personality and trampled upon everything and died of starvation. Wonderful stories with very sad endings nothing like a good fairytale.
Light leads us to change and evolve, while darkness causes us to shrivel-up and die. There is Truth in Knowledge and Reason and by it all that is hidden is revealed but only for the OVERCOMERS. The overcomers in the time of Christ were the Apostles and early followers. Today the overcomers have evolved and are lead by what God has placed upon their hearts and their minds. They are a shining example to everyone because their hearts are open, as are their eyes and ears.
Sandy I want to thank you for the honey as it became very sweet in my mouth.
Jun 28th, 2003, 8:32 PM
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>If you don't want a scientific argument about creation don't make scientific posts and don't quote creation scientists.[/quote]
AO, you are right of course, please forgive me for being out of sorts. It is no excuse, but I wrenched my back and pain makes me grumpy.......sorry.
In the physical sense, darkness is absence of light
In the spiritual sense. Light=absolute truth....absolute truth= Jesus Christ, the Word of God (Rev 19:13)
Darkness = absence of absolute truth=anti ( against) Christ
John 8:12 When Jesus spoke again to the people he said, " I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.
Jun 29th, 2003, 6:09 AM
So what are you saying, Godsgift? That organized religion is dying? If so, great.
Wouldn't the world be better without all the pointless ceremonies and traditions of religion. People could instead find God for themselves. People could be much more openminded, Christians could read the Koran, Jews listen to the Dalai Lama and Muslims learn about the Sikh gurus. Today people are taught they have to choose one religion (and if they live in the west it pretty much has to be Christianity). There must be some truth in all of them.
Jun 29th, 2003, 8:19 AM
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There must be some truth in all of them. [/quote]
you are quite right AO, that truth is ......there is a God.
other than that, the truth becomes distorted in these other "religions". Each one contains portions of the same scripture that is in my bible. But each one was formed after Christianity, by men that took a few scriptures and twisted them around to fit what "they" thought to be true....their understanding, not the one true God's understanding in it's fullness.
Did you know that even China up to the 1400's served and believed in the same God that I do? They believed in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Then along comes an evil ruler and the belief in God changed and was distorted to fit MAN's ideas.
To document what I claim here would take some research, so take it or not, but the truth is, that man has made a mess of God's way, to fit his selfish, carnal nature.....it was easier to do this ( it made the FLESH happy), than to live the way God meant us to.
Jun 29th, 2003, 9:12 AM
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Each one contains portions of the same scripture that is in my bible. But each one was formed after Christianity, by men that took a few scriptures and twisted them around to fit what "they" thought to be true....their understanding, not the one true God's understanding in it's fullness[/quote] Do you not think the Jews would say exactly the same thing about Christianity? Their religion was formed first and then changed by one man's understanding of it.
Jun 29th, 2003, 9:59 AM
All "religions" are based on other religions or are different interpretations of another, even Christianity. Christianity is actually a re-hashed version of ZOROASTRIANISM which was founded about 3500 years ago by a "prophet", Zarathushtra.
You also state that "along comes an evil ruler and the belief in God changed and was distorted to fit MAN's ideas." In my opinion the idea of God was created by man to give him a purpose in life, a sense of not being alone or a way of controlling the populace. Hence God was created "to fit MAN's ideas."
If there is such a thing as God who is to see he's looking down on us, maybe he also is looking up.
Jun 29th, 2003, 2:21 PM
Jazzman. God was not created by man, but man by God
AO, for one thing, as a Christian, I have been "Grafted" in to the family of Jews. We believe the same OT, it's is the Jew that denies that Christ came in the flesh that did not search the scriptures for the truth of the Lord Jesus Christ and so does not believe in the NT. However, there are many Jews, starting with Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and so on that believed and many NOW that do also.
Their "religion" was not changed by one man, God come in the flesh.....Jesus Christ, but fullfilled....they just missed some really important points. ( "they" meaning, those that denyJesus as Christ.....Messiah)
Jun 29th, 2003, 2:46 PM
SP50: The Muslims believe in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. You just don't believe in Mohammed, like the Jews don't believe in Jesus.
Jun 29th, 2003, 5:40 PM
Ah, but the difference there is the same bible that I and the orthodox Jews believe prophesies about Jesus......some just chose to miss or missinterpret it.
The Muslims do not believe in Jesus nor does their book.....(of which only some scriptures are present.....those that fit the pleasure of the man who wrote it).......have any reference to Him as saviour of mankind.
I got an email once ( and I have not researched this) that said the koran was written by a Rabi and a Catholic preist that were held prisoner until they gave the muslims a holy book....for they did not have one. Don't know the truth of it, but it was interesting.
You have to understand the Muslim religion started as a direct result of Sarah not believing she could have a child in her old age, even though God said it was going to happen. So she gave her hand maiden to Abraham to bare him a child , thinking this would fullfill God's promise to Abraham...that he would be the father of many nations. It was Sarah's unbelief that to this day brings those that follow the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob problems. Isaac is the child born of Sarah, the one that God intended. Ishmael is the handmaiden's ( Hagar)son..... When Hagar was carrying Ismael, an angel of the Lord told her to name the child she carried, Ishmael, then told her this about her son.." he will be a wild man and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren.....you see, Hagar was egyptian.....the word egyptian is used to characterize the "world"....the "world" being that which is without God. the Word says that he who loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
It is Ismael that is the "father" of the muslim faith.
Isaac, his half brother is the one blessed by God as the father of many nations,like his father, Abraham.....one who followed and
The holy book of the muslims is the Koran.....where it is said within the text that Christians and Jews are heathens, to be killed in the name of Allah. There is much in the Koran that is NOT in the Holy Bible....but there are SOME scriptures from our bible injected where it "fits" in the Koran.
The holy book of Christians is the Holy Bible OT and NT
The holy book of Orthodox Jews is the Torah....the same OT that is in the Christian Holy Bible
Another Holy book of the Jews is the Talmud - a collection of laws and customs of the Jews.
The only "religion" that claims Jesus Christ as the Messiah is Christian.
All others claim he was nothing but a prophet.
That is the biggest difference between Christianity and other "religions. The most important one....for God said that ANY who believes on His Son shall have everlasting life and not perish. It is the belief in Jesus Christ, the one and only son of God and Him crucified that brings salvation to the individual......that is the only thing that saves a person.
It was by grace that God sent His son, and by grace and only grace that we can be saved. Not by works lest any man should boast.
Jun 29th, 2003, 7:16 PM
Your entire argument is based on ONE book. And this ONE book is used by both you and the jews to prove each other wrong. Your arguments have nothing but your faith to back them up. I get lots of emails clainimg lots of things, some i wish were true but its safe to say the about 100% are just made up chain letters or other garbage someone who was bored sat down and wrote up. Organized religion is just a huge cult when you step back and look at it.
Jun 29th, 2003, 10:34 PM
Mike makes an excellent point to show who does not believe in whom. The Jews don't believe in Christ and the Christians don't believe in Mohammed. The OT speaks of Christ and Mohammed appearing before the Great Day of the Wrath of God. The NT talks about Mohammed and the end of the Age.
The Koran recognises Christ and glorifies him and talks about the Prince of Peace. What is revealed by God is a mystery to men when they choose to not to listen or to see.
Someone e-mailed me that the Earth is the center of the universe and the Sun revolves around it. Mohammed told his followers in the seventh century that the Earth revolves around the sun, as it is written in the Koran. Seems to me that the Priests and Rabis at that time still believed that the sun revolved around the earth, if they were writing the Koran it seems that they were still trying to mislead people then. People say many things when trying to prove things to be false but in the end those arguements prove to be fatal.
SP50 you show a connection but don't follow through to recognise the importance of Islam and God's plan. You grasp to retain a hold on the corrupt teachings of Men and refuse to see what God has revealed in the Bible, the Koran or the Bayan and stub your nose at the Kitab-i-Aqdas. Your faith is strong and your steadfastness is admirable but if God judges as you say and you have been mislead by the corruption of men then it is your soul that is at risk. I know and understand the Gloriousness of Christ as the kinsmen-redeemer but do you understand what God is doing or are you so deluded by the erroneous teachings of the churches that you refuse to recognise were we are at. God has shared his plan with everyone that is willing to have ear, the proof is in the Bible and the Truth has been planted in our hearts and our minds. The time now is for overcomers, read your Bible and find out about overcomers. Christ was an overcomer and refused satanic fancies, are you an overcomer or do you let the body control you?Do you lovingly help people along with their burden or do you push them down and flog them with your words?
Jun 29th, 2003, 11:06 PM
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Mike makes an excellent point to show who does not believe in whom. The Jews don't believe in Christ and the Christians don't believe in Mohammed. The OT speaks of Christ and Mohammed appearing before the Great Day of the Wrath of God. The NT talks about Mohammed and the end of the Age.[/quote]
SAY WHAT???? I don't recognize the bible you speak of...my bible does most certainly NOT speak of mohammed, not in the OT or the NT.......I never heard of mohammed until I met a muslim many many years ago......Muslims pray to "shakes" (?sp)....I knew one who followed Islam. Thing is Jesus said the only way to the Father was through Him. When He died on the cross, His death put an end to the priesthood....he became the last in the line of priests.....He is our only priest, the only way to the Father.
I do not refuse to see what is in my bible......I DO however refuse to see things the way of the Bahai, as you do.
Bahai is yet another of the man made "religions" that has taken scriptures out of my bible and added it to the words of a man that claims to be Christ or the Messiah.....a false god.
I know that I know the truth and you have had blinders put on your eyes to it. I pray that in your quest, you will stop listening to man's wisdom and allow the true wisdom of God almighty in. Then and only then will you understand.
You say you have the Holy Spirit.....The Holy Spirit does not work in false religions, but He will work with you, if you ask Him to, with a pure heart, seeking the truth.
Jun 30th, 2003, 4:12 AM
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Bahai is yet another of the man made "religions" that has taken scriptures out of my bible and added it to the words of a man that claims to be Christ or the Messiah.....a false god.[/quote]
Can you tell me why your religion is not man-made ?
* This is not an insult I genuinely want to know *
I have already stated in a previous post i think Christianity is based on Zoroastrianism.
Jun 1st, 2004, 3:01 AM
Jun 1st, 2004, 3:09 AM
There is no reason we should believe in the bible. Now stop diggin up ancient threads........ :gotcha:
Jun 1st, 2004, 3:11 AM
yes yes, we know your opinions, but I'd like to see what some of the fresher members have to post--regardless of the age of the thread.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.6 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.