xjwsforChrist

Hello Everyone. Since this site is xjws for Christ. I will post something for Christ.
I was raised as a JW and did not escape until I was 31 years old.
After I escaped I read several different bible translations cover to cover
5 times. So that I could see for myself what the bible was about. That is just
a little bit about me. This past year I started watching videos by Kent Hovind on
youtube. I find his videos very up-building and informative so I am sharing this
with any who are looking for some encouragement and Christian understanding.

I am aware that Kent Hovind is in the federal penitentiary but his message
and understanding of the scriptures are my focus.

Kent Hovind is a young earth creationist and he explains why he is.
The link below will hook you up with his video series on youtube.
The only interest or association I have with Kent Hovind is I find
his videos very encouraging and spirit filled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjTObZYg0mo

Here is another good program 100 reasons why evolution is wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM

Thank you for those contributions, dear Jaguarbass (and, again, welcome and peace to you!). I don't think this is the right "room" for them, though, so I am going to ask that they be moved to, say, the "Science/Politics/WorldEvents" or "Faith/Religion/Bible" room? I think the latter is most appropriate, in spite of the video topics?

Again, thank you, welcome, and peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

Faith religion and the Bible seems fine. Thank you.

Oh, I can move that for you.

Haven't watched your videos, yet, ....

But WELCOME, Jaguarbass!!!

Glad to have you here.


Peace to you!

tammy

Welcome as well Jaguarbass...

Justmom

To deny evolution and to advocate a young earth is, well...an affront to all that have been proven by science to date.
Now, I don't deny that the view that many have of evolution is wrong but the problem lays in their VIEW and not what evolution is ( without the silly politics of course).
There are cultures that have been proven to be older than 6000 years, the whole premises of YEC is just so wrong, I don't know where to start

Is it possible that the "age" the earth/universe APPEARS to be, in light of OUR means for measuring "time"... is misleading (peace to you all!), possibly even inaccurate as to the reality of its age? For example, there are cases of humans "aging" faster than "normal" (progeria). Is it possible that the acceleration of the physical universe AWAY from the origin (the big bang, if you will) affects time as we know it (because we are only on one very small, tiny, speck IN it)... and that there is time "outside" of our time... that has had an affect on the physical universe and its contents... so as to make it APPEAR to be a certain age... when perhaps it's actually another?

And if so, is it possible that something that is a certain "age" based on OUR means of measuring time... is actually younger (or pehaps even older)... than our measurement makes it APPEAR to be?

Not saying there is. Just asking if it's possible.

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA

Its possible that if my grandmother had testicles she would have been my grandfather.


Possibilities are great, what we need to remember is the age of the earth is attested through MULTIPLE forms of evidence, the very same evidence that is used to date pretty much everything else that even YEC agree with, so...

Yes, dear P (again, peace to you, dear one!). Those would be forms of evidence limited to our (very) little world... and times... though, yes?

Again, just askin'...

Peace to you!

YSSFS of Christ,

SA, who wasn't really trying to support the YEC's theory but just asking as to how we "measure"... "time"... for now...

Possibilities are great, what we need to remember is the age of the earth is attested through MULTIPLE forms of evidence, the very same evidence that is used to date pretty much everything else that even YEC agree with, so...


What methods of dating the earth are not based on circular reasoning?

If you watch Hovinds videos he shows that carbon dating and the other
dating methods do not work.

Hovind believes in Micro evolution.
If you don't watch the videos, why do you comment on them?
The earth has to be young for the bible to be true.
I dont really want to argue with people like on JWN, I am trying to
encourage people about Jesus and the bible.

Indeed and no one is more aware of the limitations of the VARIOUS methods used in dating anything then those that use them and that is why they use MULTIPLE lines of evidence to date things.
The fact is that IF we doubt these methods then EVERY date we have is to be doubted because every date we have for ancient timelines is based on the cumulative evidence from various methods.
In other words, we are getting into the "watchtower" method of chronology and I think we all agree that is NOT the way to go.

I did watch the video and he makes valid points BUT that doesn't really address the issue that the dates we have are estimates, yes of course and every one knows that, but they are also based on far more than carbon dating ( the age of the universe is estimated based on things like back ground radiation and isotope half lives and so forth and NOT on carbon dating by the way).

As for micro-evolution, yes that is hard to deny and I don't know many that do, BUT the issue is that macro-evolution is simply when so many changes have happen to a species VIA micro-evolution that the current species can NOT mate with the "original" species and has now become a "new" species.
That is the "general" view of when "macro-evolution" occurs.

the age of the universe is estimated based on things like back ground radiation and isotope half lives and so forth and NOT on carbon dating by the way).

Yes, but are we SURE we know EVERYTHING there is to know about that, dear P (good morning and peace to you!)? For example, there are some elements in our world, within our planet, actually... that we believe exist. Yet, we have have not really ever seen or analyzed the "real" deal, at least not with our modern methods. We have only seen/analyzed what has been artificially recreated these in labs. As a result, we have theories as to the origination of these (where they came from and how), but having never seen/analyzed the real deal... how can we be CERTAIN? What if we find we are wrong about some of that, say, that according to OUR dating methods such are of a "certain" age... but in REALITY their origin would suggest another age, perhaps even outside of OUR means for measuring "time"?

Again, not saying any of this is TRUE; just curious, given how our knowledge of our own world often changes, we can assume that this particular issue is "set in stone." If our minds can only grasp that which exists in our own world, then perhaps that makes sense. But that could be quite short-sighted, yes?

Let me ask you and perhaps you can help ME understand:

If something that occurred, say, on... say, one far side of the physical universe... and somehow made its way to the OTHER far side of the physical universe... but did not travel by means of the circumference, but back THROUGH the center (or, okay, maybe not the exact center but somewhat back on the radius and continuing along the diameter, to some degree)... is it not possible that the reverse of course could ALSO mean a reverse of time? Is time ALWAYS moving forward in our universe?

In addition, could not the "travel" THROUGH the physical universe result in objects (stars, moons, planets) being "aged" more than they literally are due to the various radiation contacts, etc.? For example (and this is not right on but will perhaps give you an idea of what I mean)... I can take a brand new pair of blue jeans and, after hitting them with some acid... or washing them a few times (which moves them around quite violently during the procees)... "age" them. Is it possible that the physical universe engages in some similar cosmic process, given the violent movements that have occurred in it from the start?

Again, not trying to say that this IS what occurred/is occurring. Just wondering if it's possible... that the "age" of things may be affected by things we are not yet fully aware of.

As you stated, though, anything's POSSIBLE. If that's true, though, I find it kind of short-sighted to rule "everything" else beyond how we currently "date" things out. Folks often say that "science" doesn't say this or that is TRUE. Yet, when I read your comments on the "methods" and why we should believe their outcome it seems to ME that folks believe such IS true/the truth. Sure, those who agree with it might not come right out and say, "This is the TRUTH." But woe to you if you don't completely buy it - something's "wrong" with you and your thinking faculties because (to those who DO buy it in full)... it "makes sense."

Yet, things that "make sense" to folks like ME (which ISN'T that which makes sense to most religionists - they would oppose what I share, as well... as has been shown/proven more than once) aren't given the same credence. I just think that what we THINK we know we often find out we don't. Not just with regard to "spiritual" things, but with regard to science, too. So how one points the finger at the other and says "You don't know Jack!" is always confusing to ME.

Not trying to put down science, not at ALL... and I think you know that. I just don't agree that science and spirituality are as diametrically opposed as some do. As I've often stated, I think there are elements of both that do... and will yet... PROVE the other. We just not stop closing doors and eliminating options that haven't even been touched on, let alone fully explored.

Ennywho... just my curiosity-based $0.02.

Peace to you all!

A slave of Christ,

SA

I think that science will eventually understand how limited it's views are in regards to many things it "knows" to be "facts".
Not that they are NOT correct but that they are not as "set in stone" as we think.
Our reality is just that, OUR reality in THIS dimension.
It has very little to do with the reality of other dimensions/universes.

That said, most of the things used to date the universe are accepted because they are verifiable and repeatable.
Physics is remarkably accurate in what it does, not perfect mind, but very accurate.
The dates may will be off BUT I don't think they will be off by billions or even millions.

If they dates are off, then ALL the dates are off and I wonder if people realize what that truly means.

The date of 607BC is a fine example of what we are talking about.
MULTIPLE lines of evidence show that the fall of Jerusalem was 587 and if those lines are wrong ( ALL of them, not just one or two) then so are the dates that lead to 607 because the same lines are used to verify every other date, such as the fall of Babylon in 539.