I was wondering that too.Is English your second language? It is my second
language, so if you are still a beginner, I will
understand.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I was wondering that too.Is English your second language? It is my second
language, so if you are still a beginner, I will
understand.
You say that science KNOWS. That is totally incorrect.
Based on evidence, and the interpretation of that evidence, science postulates and creates a theory.
Theories aren´t absolute knowledge.
I once read a brilliant article by an MIT physics professor who now teaches in Israel.
His position was that distance dialates time. I have it somewhere, I will try and find it.
His thought experiment was this.
If in a very distant galaxy a powerful laser released a beam toward earth every second, the light, because of dialation would not arrive on earth seconds apart, but rather weeks apart.
So, at the point of origin the time element was seconds, on earth it was weeks, or more.
Both are right. so looking back the universe appears to be 14 billion years old, but because of time dialation it may have been created a million years ago.
This is a crude summation of what I read some time ago, It will no doubt be picked apart by someone, but I hope to retrieve the article and rebut the pickers apart.
I was wondering that too.
That was an observation. You merely took a word out of context and put your own, non-expert interpretation on it. To show that you are wrong I only need the countless versions that do not perform that error:Well, dont make an accusation, show me where I am wrong.
Yes. it is all related to E=MC2. The expansion of the universe ¨stretches time in distance, thus effecting the measurement at point A at the beginning of the expansion and point B a great distance from the beginning point of expansion. Time dilation.That isn't what time dilation actually is. Time dilation is differences in time measurement due to velocity of the observer. Time measurement slow for the observer at high velocity compared to one that is not. So an hour could pass the observer moving at a high velocity while it could be 3 hours for the low velocity observer. This has been tested with the higher speeds we are capable of via planes using atomic clocks.
Not exactly. The "moving person" would also observe the other person's clock moving more slowly. There is no absolute motion in physics so who is moving and who is stationary all depends on frame of reference.That isn't what time dilation actually is. Time dilation is differences in time measurement due to velocity of the observer. Time measurement slow for the observer at high velocity compared to one that is not. So an hour could pass the observer moving at a high velocity while it could be 3 hours for the low velocity observer. This has been tested with the higher speeds we are capable of via planes using atomic clocks.
My dear friend.That was an observation. You merely took a word out of context and put your own, non-expert interpretation on it. To show that you are wrong I only need the countless versions that do not perform that error:
Genesis 1:16 God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night. And He made the stars as well.
Changing the translation because the Bible would be wrong if one did not is never a valid reason to do so.
Yes. it is all related to E=MC2. The expansion of the universe ¨stretches time in distance, thus effecting the measurement at point A at the beginning of the expansion and point B a great distance from the beginning point of expansion. Time dilation.
Some Christians can think what they want, the Bible never says the Earth and Universe is 6 000 years old.If the speed of light was significantly higher in the past than today, there would have been a corresponding increase in energy released by matter (per the equation.) All stars require the reaction of matter in order for there to be the fusion that makes them work. Some Christians think the earth is only 6000 years old. If that were true and we apply their hypothesis to Einstein's equation for our sun, then 6000 year ago our sun would have put out about 800 billion times the energy it does today. Too toasty for life.
Some Christians can think what they want, the Bible never says the Earth and Universe is 6 000 years old.
Some Christians knows the Earth is 6 000 years ols plus all the time that passed between the "Beginning" and the "First day".
Could be billions of years, who cares.
The Bible is correct and science agrees.
My dear friend.
If this is your argument, I want you to know that out of hundreds of manuscripts, including the DSS which contain at least 3 manuscripts of Genesis as early as 200BC, all of them do not have the words "He made ...".
If you do not want to accept a small fact about one verse in the Bible that is actually cast in concrete, I understand why you are an Atheist.
Pure "Bible derangement syndrome".
There is no evidence that I know of that implies that the speed of light has ever varied.If the speed of light was significantly higher in the past than today, there would have been a corresponding increase in energy released by matter (per the equation.) All stars require the reaction of matter in order for there to be the fusion that makes them work. Some Christians think the earth is only 6000 years old. If that were true and we apply their hypothesis to Einstein's equation for our sun, then 6000 years ago our sun would have put out about 800 billion times the energy it does today. Too toasty for life.
As my high school English teacher used those words, I think your local English teachers also can do the same.Sorry, you are not using those words correctly. At least not in English. In another language possibly, but I have my doubts. You would need to be able to support that claim.
Ok, except that upu are off the topic, you should tell me if God instructed that canibalism?
did he approve of it?
............. Some Christians think the earth is only 6000 years old. If that were true and we apply their hypothesis to Einstein's equation for our sun, then 6000 years ago our sun would have put out about 800 billion times the energy it does today. Too toasty for life.
Noah could have easily had pre-flood writings taken on the Ark with him (Genesis 5)Why not? Genesis and Exodus were written after the Babylonian exile.. redacted and amended several times.
I would like to take the liberty to add to the ^ above ^ that some ' so-called Christians...'
'Christendom' (so-called Christian but mostly in name only) might teach 6,000 years, but the Bible does Not.
Just as there is No time limit given to God's 7th day, there is No time frame given for the six creative days.
God's 7th day was still on going in the first century according to Hebrews 4:4-11 and is still on going.
There is No mention if each of the creative days were of the same or differing lengths of time.
Noah could have easily had pre-flood writings taken on the Ark with him (Genesis 5)
Those writings could have been passed on to Moses for Moses to use.
After all, Scripture is 'the mind of God' written down for us - 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Now you are merely spouting nonsense. .As my high school English teacher used those words, I think your local English teachers also can do the same.
To me it is Not another language even though Genesis was written in Hebrew so a local Rabbi could also shed light.
So, to me English teachers and Jewish Rabbi's could support my claim about the difference between the words ' create ' and ' make '.
We think of God creating Adam, and how did God create Adam but by forming Adam from existing earth/ground.
So, who could Not see the difference that Adam was Not a direct Creation, but created by being formed out of already existing creation.