• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

All the long age dating techniques have been proven to be false as they vastly vary in measuring the age of the same thing – part 2

SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Esteban X said:
There is no law of entropy, you may mean the second law of thermodynamics which only applies to closed system, which is not the case here..
Click to expand...
The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to living creatures of course.
And when they die what happens to them? Lots of disorder.
And when they reproduce there are errors in the genetic code which will increase the the genome of ALL species over time,
 
Esteban X

Esteban X

Member
SavedByTheLord said:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to living creatures of course.
And when they die what happens to them? Lots of disorder.
Click to expand...
No. You are ignoring the fact that a living creature is not a closed system. Even dead a living creature is a biome of other living creatures so decay, while you may see it as disorder, is in fact a vibrant living system.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Esteban X said:
No. You are ignoring the fact that a living creature is not a closed system. Even dead a living creature is a biome of other living creatures so decay, while you may see it as disorder, is in fact a vibrant living system.
Click to expand...
The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to living creatures of course.
And when they die what happens to them? Lots of disorder.
And when they reproduce there are errors in the genetic code which will increase the the genome of ALL species over time,
 
Esteban X

Esteban X

Member
SavedByTheLord said:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to living creatures of course.
And when they die what happens to them? Lots of disorder.
And when they reproduce there are errors in the genetic code which will increase the the genome of ALL species over time,
Click to expand...
So you said before. You're still wrong
 
TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to living creatures of course.
And when they die what happens to them? Lots of disorder.
And when they reproduce there are errors in the genetic code which will increase the the genome of ALL species over time,
Click to expand...
Living things live on the earth.
Earth is not a closed system.
Earth is fed with workable energy by the sun 24/7

Once again, your nonsense is so easily shown to be just that: nonsense.

If entropy were a problem for living things, then a tree would not grow. Babies wouldn't become adults.
Nothing would live.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
SavedByTheLord said:
No.
The RCC was never the church.
Ans the cannon existed since before 70 AD.
Click to expand...

Well:
The Catholic Church provided a conciliar definition of its biblical canon in 382 at the (local) Council of Rome (based upon the Decretum Gelasianum, of uncertain authorship)[4][5] as well as at the Council of Trent of 1545, reaffirming the Canons of Florence of 1442 and North African Councils (Hippo and Carthage) of 393–419.[6][7] For the Church of England, it was made dogmatic on the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563; for Calvinism, on the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647.

For the first three hundred years of Christianity, there was no widely agreed upon canon. -- Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia


Thus, the canon you likely use as most Protestant churches do, is from that Catholic canon.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
A
metis said:
Well:
The Catholic Church provided a conciliar definition of its biblical canon in 382 at the (local) Council of Rome (based upon the Decretum Gelasianum, of uncertain authorship)[4][5] as well as at the Council of Trent of 1545, reaffirming the Canons of Florence of 1442 and North African Councils (Hippo and Carthage) of 393–419.[6][7] For the Church of England, it was made dogmatic on the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563; for Calvinism, on the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647.

For the first three hundred years of Christianity, there was no widely agreed upon canon. -- Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia


Thus, the canon you likely use as most Protestant churches do, is from that Catholic canon.
Click to expand...
And the list of books and the words in those books all existed before 70 AD.
Thanks for proving my claim.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
SavedByTheLord said:
A

And the list of books and the words in those books all existed before 70 AD.
Thanks for proving my claim.
Click to expand...

That's not the point, so all you are doing is playing games.

Most of the books reviewed prior to canonization were rejected by the church for various reasons, thus the selection of the canon wasn't a slam dunk. Also, other churches by the 4th century chose some other books not in the Catholic and most Protestant canons, probably including yours.

The sad reality is that you really don't know much about early church history, so maybe do some studying on that matter.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
metis said:
That's not the point, so all you are doing is playing games.

Most of the books reviewed prior to canonization were rejected by the church for various reasons, thus the selection of the canon wasn't a slam dunk. Also, other churches by the 4th century chose some other books not in the Catholic and most Protestant canons, probably including yours.

The sad reality is that you really don't know much about early church history, so maybe do some studying on that matter.
Click to expand...
The early church histroy is in the 27 NT books.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Esteban X said:
You'll have to show me some serious scholarship to back up that claim.
Click to expand...
No NT book mentions the destruction of the temple and that occurred circa 70 AD.
So all written before then.
And the apostles were all alive before 70 AD so would have accepted the 27 books.
 
Nimos

Nimos

Well-Known Member
AdamjEdgar said:
So, as i said, science is not infallible and that is because the issue isnt the science, its the method and interpretations used in order to support pre existing hypothesis that is the problem. In the case of the Chamberlains, all evidence to the contrary of convicting her was disgarded and the result was a guilty verdict in 2 different court hearings.
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with science? two court hearings and a faulty product = science being wrong.
 
Esteban X

Esteban X

Member
SavedByTheLord said:
No NT book mentions the destruction of the temple and that occurred circa 70 AD.
So all written before then.
And the apostles were all alive before 70 AD so would have accepted the 27 books.
Click to expand...
Then why do the majority of Christian scholars place the authorship of most of the New Testament at a later date?
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Esteban X said:
Then why do the majority of Christian scholars place the authorship of most of the New Testament at a later date?
Click to expand...
Beware of the scribes and especially beware of ”the scholars”

No NT book mentions the destruction of the temple and that occurred circa 70 AD.
So all written before then.
 
Esteban X

Esteban X

Member
SavedByTheLord said:
Beware of the scribes and especially beware of ”the scholars”

No NT book mentions the destruction of the temple and that occurred circa 70 AD.
So all written before then.
Click to expand...
I would suggest being wary of the ignorant and certain before being wary of scholars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top