Apparent Age

If I may: Navy10E, you are being a bad example. Shape up. When a person comes by their feelings honestly those feelings are to be respected.On the issue, suppose God assembled the universe to teach faith in Christ and not science. If so, then He is not a deciever or a trickster - people are simply attempting to extract something that is not there and was not intended to be there.For example, a person who wants to learn first-aid signs up for a course. After the first lesson in CPR is s/he allowed to assume that the human body is made out of rubber? I can expand on this as needed but wish to be succinct for now.Just a thought with best wishes,
Bob, Alice, and Eve

The universe may have been created to teach faith in Christ, but it hardly inspires confidence in the biblical account of the earth's history. There are so many things which give such a very good impression of great age. That it should have been unintended - a coincidence - is quite out of the question.

If you meant to write "Bible" rather than "Universe" that would make sense.But as written it certainly does not make sense - our observations of the Universe by necessity teach us about the Universe - and many of those observatiosn tell us nothing about Jesus. If God made those observations misleading then God is a deceiver.

I appreciate your response.Here is my personal belief (so as to not appear to be dancing around - though I can debate any side of these issues from nearly any of the many points of view).The universe was created many billions of earth years ago, probably by a process much like the "big bang". The earth was then created from material in the universe - both similarly to how science sees it, no? I do not consider this to be extra-Biblical. I have studied Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 (I posted a what-if on that topic today) thoroughly and think the fit is perfect.I am not seeking reconciliation or being a chicken. How the earth and the universe were formed does not matter when the real goal is much higher. I happen to enjoy the company of people here (except a person who wages war in the name of Christ when there is no need).Hope this helps you see my point of view a little clearer. Please continue to ask if you think I would be able to clear up open issues with additional posts.Bob, Alice, and Eve

Not only that but the logic doesnt make sense. If one needs to grasp the 6 day creation story as literal then fine, but one should not bring the word science up in the same sentence. Why is it that *some creationist feel the need to disprove science? Penicillin is not mentioned in the bible but I see no creationist attempting to conduct trials to disprove it's effectivness in treating infection. *edit to insert the word (some)[This message has been edited by 1.61803, 03-15-2004]

Man, inspired or not, wrote the Bible. If God created the Universe, then this is the book that he wrote himself. I would think that you would look at God's direct word instead of the written, human translation of His theology. The Bible tells you how to go the heaven, not how the heavens go. If you really believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, then you might as well argue that the Sun orbits the earth as many early christians did.[This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 03-15-2004]

Science is repeatable either by experiment or observation. By your argument no one should ever be tried for a crime since it isn't repeated. Forensics is moot to you.