Isaac
Lifelong Learner
- Local time
- Yesterday, 17:59
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2017
- Messages
- 10,107
I don't have anywhere near the time to go back and find each source, but over the past 20 years I have done a fair amount of reading from scientists and archeologists that demonstrated exactly what I asserted above. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Obviously, whatever I read, you haven't read, and vice versa I'm sure.I have GOT to challenge that statement. Go to the Grand Canyon (I have done so) and look at the sedimentation deposit layers to see how many of them there are and start adding up the years for each. I also have seen the ludicrous arguments that ignorant people have made using religion to attempt to negate the laws of physics regarding evaporation and sedimentation. When a religious apologist tries to negate raw, testable physics, the only respect earned that way is that the apologist has a career in self-deprecating comedy.
I have noticed that you have often tried to tell me what is or isn't Christian teaching. Many things occur to me in this moment, but I think I'll restrain myself to simply say, with respect, you might consider the idea that as a lifelong Christian, I'm fairly familiar with Christian teaching - that which I think is mainstream for (as I have mentioned before), specifically, Christian Protestant, generally non-denominational (although my flavor probably has 95% in common with Baptist or Evangelical Free Church theology).If you follow Bishop Ussher, you get about 6,400 years (or is it 6,600 by now?) I forget, but it is in that range. If you ARE using 10,000, you are looking at the age of non-Christian civilizations such as are found in S.E. Asia. That isn't a Christian teaching.
And I've never heard of Bishop Ussher.
We all try to understand other people's religions, politics, science backgrounds, etc., but where it gets humorous is when for example I try to tell you the "most well known scientists" (even though you would know that, I wouldn't), or when you try to tell me with the implication that someone is a well known or most core representative of my Christianity teaching (even though you wouldn't know that - you may try and that's respectable, but it won't come anywhere near someone who's spent 43 years on the inside of the teaching, churches, etc).
This is especially pertinent to religion, where the secular world's labeling of "major Christian leader" or "primary theologian", etc., very rarely match how I would deem such a thing, and which labels are usually even curated in order to bolster the argument the secular article is making, etc.
For example, when CNN talks about "major Evangelical leaders", I almost never agree that they are anywhere near a major leader in the area, sometimes never having heard of them in fact.
I doubt you'll acknowledge that point so I respectfully heretofore agree to disagree with you on that.
"That isn't a Christian teaching" - I think I'll leave my previous points to stand as that statement is evident enough on its face to be a somewhat strange assertion, since you are talking to a Christian.
The problem is you're using secular methods of determining age to tell me that my Christian interpretation goes back before Christian civilizations - which makes no sense!
I do not know where you got (hopefully not from me?) that I believe the earth started at the same time God spoke to Abraham.
It always feels strange when someone tries to tell you what you believe.
It sounds like me talking to a Jew and yelling "You can't possibly believe that! That's not a Jewish teaching!"
And the Jew saying really? Could've fooled me!