steven8166 Posted May 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12King James Version (KJV)2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.I stick with science in understanding the birth and death of stars instead of the stone age beliefs of some guy who lived about 2000 years ago.How do you think the higher atomic numbered elements where made?We are star dust, every single atom in our body except Hydrogen was made in one of more old stars.Now that is science and the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven8166 Posted May 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 So you think that all science indicating the contrary is false?I think that "all science indicates" is theory, they have no evidence to their theories. as to fossels, it is circular reasoning, "The rock is a million years old because it hat a million year old fossels in it and the fossels are a million years old because they are in a million year old rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorian Gray Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Your answer to Carbon 14 dating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven8166 Posted May 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Steven8166 may I remind you that before God said let there be light and he judged it as good there was only darkness and God was that darkness God was not the darkness, the darkness was outside of God. The word "Darkness" as used in Genisis has several meanings. It can mean darkness, misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness, night, obscurity, and to hide.Are you saying that the darkness in the beginning of Genesis was evil? how can that be since evil had not come into the world yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorian Gray Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 God was not the darkness, the darkness was outside of God. The word "Darkness" as used in Genisis has several meanings. It can mean darkness, misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness, night, obscurity, and to hide.Are you saying that the darkness in the beginning of Genesis was evil? how can that be since evil had not come into the world yet.I see nothing of the sort in Fawzo's post. What I see is Fawzo implying that the darkness (absence of light) is of God as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Your answer to Carbon 14 dating?Pretty darn accurate and explainable by quantum theory.And without application of quantum theory we would not even have computers to watch this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven8166 Posted May 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Your answer to Carbon 14 dating?Carbon dating is theory only, they have no way of proving the findings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorian Gray Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 I think you might want to look in to it a bit more. It is not theory, it is fact. Unless you doubt now carbon decays which is predictable, consistent and reproducible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven8166 Posted May 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Pretty darn accurate and explainable by quantum theory.And without application of quantum theory we would not even have computers to watch this forum.again a theory, no evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 again a theory, no evidence.LOLAnd your computer usage is theory as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Songster Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Old news- Carbon dating is not accurate. http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us/errors-are-feared-in-carbon-dating.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bro. Hex Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 (edited) Carbon dating is theory only, they have no way of proving the findings.Steven, your position on carbon dating strikes me as, well, "fantasy".As for "proving" carbon dating, or any other scientific theory, for that matter.In science, nothing ever gets "proven beyond the possibility of error".Wrong theories get "disproved", but nothing in science ever gets "proven".We didn't "prove" that the earth is round (as opposed to "flat"), but we have certainly "substantiated" its spherical nature with lots of "evidence".And that is precisely the case with carbon dating. There is lots of "evidence" supporting the correctness of "the theory",just as there is lots of "evidence" to support "the theory" that water is really 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen.So, saying that carbon dating is "just a theory" puts it into the same category as "E=mC2"....It has never been "proven", but it sure makes one hell of a KABOOM !! Edited May 28, 2012 by Bro. Hex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorian Gray Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Old news- Carbon dating is not accurate. http://www.nytimes.c...nted=all&src=pmMight want to re-read the acticle and get the real info vs the headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Old news- Carbon dating is not accurate. http://www.nytimes.c...nted=all&src=pmFrom the article:They arrived at this conclusion by comparing age estimates obtained using two different methods - analysis of radioactive carbon in a sample and determination of the ratio of uranium to thorium in the sample. In some cases, the latter ratio appears to be a much more accurate gauge of age than the customary method of carbon dating, the scientists said.Good, if uranium to thorium gives better estimates we are all for it!But rest assured that science will not conclude the Earth is 6000 years old.But why think and use our intelligence if we simply can site the Bible and stay in the stone ages.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bro. Hex Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 (edited) Since when has sarcasm been a legitimate form of discussion?Should we all start using sarcasm in our responses?Since like FOREVER !!! Use sarcasm whenever you think it might be effective.I think that science can not grasp the greatness of God's creative power.Perhaps that is because grasping the greatness of God is NOT THE JOB of science.An automobile makes a lousy spaghetti strainer, but it's nifty for getting from place-to-place! Edited May 28, 2012 by Bro. Hex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 Perhaps that is because grasping the greatness of God is NOT THE JOB of science.I agree with that, after all science does not deal with the realm of fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplicitys-brother Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 I agree with that, after all science does not deal with the realm of fiction.I will have mmore respect for science when they have found a way to prove their theories. From where I sit, they have never proven that there is not another cause for the phenomena they claim to observe. They are in the same category as most organized religions because they are based on faith rather than truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawzo Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 I will have mmore respect for science when they have found a way to prove their theories. From where I sit, they have never proven that there is not another cause for the phenomena they claim to observe. They are in the same category as most organized religions because they are based on faith rather than truth.SB I think the fact that they can send and land a craft of various instruments millions of miles away on a widely rotating asteroid that isn't even visible to the naked eye and send us back data and photos more then proves that their theories are pretty darn solid most of the time.Who said God is limited to the law of physics, how absurd.Steven God created those perfect laws of physics why would he need to break them they work perfectly well for the purpose they were designed for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Real Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 I will have mmore respect for science when they have found a way to prove their theories. From where I sit, they have never proven that there is not another cause for the phenomena they claim to observe. They are in the same category as most organized religions because they are based on faith rather than truth.Science is based on faith?I never fail to be amazed by the lack of Vernunft that some express on this forum.I suppose the only exception is this "scientific" instrument:The Mark Super VII Quantum E-meter: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts