Ancient Writing - Just How Old is it?
Q.
Wait a minute! The written history of Jerico goes back 10,000 years as do some other ancient cities histories. Be careful about saying that there was no life before 6,000 years ago! You can still be a member and believe in pre-historic dinosaurs. We believe all truth.
A.
Not exactly a formal question, but requires answering none the less.
It must be remembered that any dating method that can't be proven to be true 100% of the time is mere conjecture. And the demonstrated dating accuracy for dating methods is nothing short of pathetic, in reality (in spite of their phony statistics).
If you are going to talk of written histories they would at least first have to claim such a date by constant recording of the history of the people over that many thousand years. There is no such writing.
As to me remaining a church member but believe things contrary to Scripture; that is true. However I would have to ask why should I? Has man proven himself to be more accurate than Scripture? So call "modern science" is full of conjecture and wild claims. The so called "evidence" for man's philosophies have more holes than a sponge. By their methods I could prove the moon was once made of cheese.
The Scriptures clearly tell me that man was "the first flesh upon the earth, the first man also." So how do I continue to express belief in Scripture and the ever changing philosophies of man? I am unable to comprehend why some members prefer to believe constantly changing ideas as more accurate than that which God has expressed and not changed his mind in thousands of years. We certainly should believe all truth, as you have expressed. And areas of provable science are good - ones where the evidence is proven by literal application. For example a working television.
But anything that can only be unprovable speculation (regardless of how good it sounds in theory) must be regarded as an interesting idea only. It must be remembered that the argument of do electrons go to protons or do protons go to electrons has been proven scientifically both ways several times. The arguments were so good sounding that the scientific community taught the latest philosophy of the time as fact with each change. So today we "know" that electrons go to protons - do we? The arguments "proving" that protons go to electrons has never been disproven in spite of the later idea now being accepted instead.
Geologists "proved" that the Persian Gulf has been going in for the last 2000 years and archaeologists have proven by fishing villages that the gulf has been going out over the last 2000 years.
This type of rubbish is no challenge to the Scriptures and I don't need to ignore what they say or treat it as some mystical writing document. True science and the Scriptures aren't in conflict and we don't need to compromise them to fit in with modern ideas.
Wait a minute! The written history of Jerico goes back 10,000 years as do some other ancient cities histories. Be careful about saying that there was no life before 6,000 years ago! You can still be a member and believe in pre-historic dinosaurs. We believe all truth.
A.
Not exactly a formal question, but requires answering none the less.
It must be remembered that any dating method that can't be proven to be true 100% of the time is mere conjecture. And the demonstrated dating accuracy for dating methods is nothing short of pathetic, in reality (in spite of their phony statistics).
If you are going to talk of written histories they would at least first have to claim such a date by constant recording of the history of the people over that many thousand years. There is no such writing.
As to me remaining a church member but believe things contrary to Scripture; that is true. However I would have to ask why should I? Has man proven himself to be more accurate than Scripture? So call "modern science" is full of conjecture and wild claims. The so called "evidence" for man's philosophies have more holes than a sponge. By their methods I could prove the moon was once made of cheese.
The Scriptures clearly tell me that man was "the first flesh upon the earth, the first man also." So how do I continue to express belief in Scripture and the ever changing philosophies of man? I am unable to comprehend why some members prefer to believe constantly changing ideas as more accurate than that which God has expressed and not changed his mind in thousands of years. We certainly should believe all truth, as you have expressed. And areas of provable science are good - ones where the evidence is proven by literal application. For example a working television.
But anything that can only be unprovable speculation (regardless of how good it sounds in theory) must be regarded as an interesting idea only. It must be remembered that the argument of do electrons go to protons or do protons go to electrons has been proven scientifically both ways several times. The arguments were so good sounding that the scientific community taught the latest philosophy of the time as fact with each change. So today we "know" that electrons go to protons - do we? The arguments "proving" that protons go to electrons has never been disproven in spite of the later idea now being accepted instead.
Geologists "proved" that the Persian Gulf has been going in for the last 2000 years and archaeologists have proven by fishing villages that the gulf has been going out over the last 2000 years.
This type of rubbish is no challenge to the Scriptures and I don't need to ignore what they say or treat it as some mystical writing document. True science and the Scriptures aren't in conflict and we don't need to compromise them to fit in with modern ideas.
posted by Doug Towers at 4:06 PM
0 comments
