When did you accept God in your life, or realize you did not believe in him?

"" The remains of Noah's ark rest on a mountain in Turkey. The Discovery channel and the History channel have both aired numerous documentaries featuring testimonies from archeologists and locals who have made the journey up the slopes, as well as old KH-11 satellite photos that show a structure buried under the snow cap that has no earthly business being up there.""

Maybe, but it's not been proven. All they can gather from the photos is maybe it's man-made, maybe it's not. But no one knows what it is either way.

 

I'll give you that most of our history cannot be proven anymore than the bible, I cant argue with you there.

Yeah I remember that, it was a long time ago, and it appears it was a hoax.

Actually, you reminded me to point out a couple of things I wanted to address, if Adam named all the animals, why do we find new species everyday and name them ourselves? And everything you mention in the last part, except for the sun being older than our solar system is what evolution says too. Fish evolved into amphibians which evolved into reptiles, which evolved into mammals and birds, mammals then evolved into humans. And if the bible is correct, does science show the Sun is one day (or how many days there were between the creation of the sun and the earth) older than the Earth? because if it doesn't, that would mean the 7 days weren’t really 7 days after all were they?

 

careful, hb. if this turns out to NOT be the ark, would you then say the noah story is bogus or would you say they just haven't found it yet?

the problem with proving the bible is that the evidence counter to biblical teaching is discounted as being wrong (can't trust science!) but then the evidence that supports the bible is always proffered as being above reproach (science even agrees!).

no. actually, not highly doubtful. let's just take the biological elements from the creation story (forget how light was created prior to the sun).

1. god creates grass and trees that bear fruit
2. god creates whales (and other sea life) and birds
3. god creates land animals
4. god creates man

obviously man would put man over animals and it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to put animals over plants.

so the question is, what about the others -- whales, birds, land animals?

technically speaking, "land animals" are the first of this group. birds didn't adapt flying from water environments and whales are mamals, which clearly come from very late in the chain. it's pretty messed up. not to mention, the fruit bearing plants would come AFTER land animals had a good foothold on earth (no reason to make tasty fruit without something to eat it).

it's not surprising that a "primitive" man would not recognize the differences between whales and fish. or that he'd just lump all land animals into one group (reptiles, amphibians, mamals).

so the claim that genesis mirrors the scientific description of how life unfolded on earth is way off the mark.

 

Scientific claims are proven wrong every single day. Every one! Not one claim of the Bible has been proven wrong. Many have been proven true, like the way Jericho fell. Yet for some reason science is trusted more than the Bible. Go figure.

More and more cosmologists become convinced of a creator every day due to recent research.

 

The cambrian explosion says that it really doesn't need to and goes a long way toward disproving evolution.

 

I'm just curious, but why would you treat this (or any other "Bible hypothesis") differently than those that are changed/updated/proven incorrect in every other field of science?

 

not sure i totally understand the question.

the point i was trying to make to hb, was that he's really quick to look to science when it helps him, and then less ready when it doesn't. and in the end, he doesn't actually care about the science, i think. he believes and so he's looking for things that re-enforce that belief, but without them, he won't stop believing.

 

the bible is can't be proven wrong because it's not science. however, claims made by the catholic church have not necessarily held up very well.

what does "more and more" mean? i'm guessing there are more agnostic cosmologists (as a percentage) than there are agnostic "regular" folks.

 

that's okay, i'm sure it'll be disproven soon, right?

 

The minute they find the bones of Christ, I quit believing in anything.