Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 34

• 0%

  mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

  this article is set in a disturbing background, but the Truth is in there.

  Like it or not, there is a war going in the Spirit realm each and every minute. Though satan was defeated at the cross, he still can destroy lives through deception. As born-again Christians, the same Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in us. We need to consistently remind ourselves that He gave us authority to walk in the power of that Spirit.

  Reply

  30 Replies

  • 0%

    icelander1 year, 6 months ago

    What kind of deception? Fossils? Light rays that should be billions of years old? Did Satan create all the scientific evidence that shows that the world is more than 6000 years old?

    Reply

    29 Replies

    • HmacComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

      • 100%

        mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

        re:Hmac - ROFL?

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • HmacComment removed: User banned.
    • 85%

      mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

      re:icelander - satan uses deception called "distortion of Truth". And NO, satan didn't create "all the scientific evidence...". He didn't create anything because he has no power to create anything. Don't forget, satan is a created being, as is the scientific mind. There is the Creator, and the creation. All of creation is beneath the Creator. satan will do anything and everything he can to distort that.

      Now where is all the scientific evidence that shows that the world is more than 6000 years old?

      Reply

      25 Replies

      • 100%

        icelander1 year, 6 months ago

        There's tons of evidence, but the most damning, in my opinion, is the visibility of stars and galaxies more than 6,000 light years from us.

        Using parallax, which is just accurate measurements and some basic trigonometry, we can measure the distance to visible stars. Most stars are more than 6000 light years (35,270,998,900,000,000 miles) away.

        The problem is that, if the universe is less than 6,000 years old, god would have had to create these beams of light en route to the earth. But why would it do that? If we could only see things less than 6000 light-years from Earth, that would provide evidence that the universe is only 6000 years old, and would cause many people to believe in god.

        But god created something that provides evidence against the creation story int he bible. So either biblical creation is untrue, or god is trying to fool us. Or god doesn't exist and the bible is simply a work of fiction.

        Reply

        8 Replies

        • 100%

          mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

          re:icelander - there's tons of "theories" out there. Carbon-dating has been scientifically proven to be unreliable. The Hubble Telescope is providing information that is showing a different relationship between light and time that was previously accepted. These big-gun scientists actually call themselves "theorists". They take great pride in creating new theories. As they learn more, they either disproove a previous theory, or if they can't proove or disproove it, they stash it away in an archive and herald another "great mind" for having brilliantly concocted it.

          Reply

          7 Replies

          • 0%

            mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

            re: "problem is that, if the universe is less than 6,000 years old, god would have had to create these beams of light en route to the earth..."

            Brilliant! God COULD do that. Add that to your list of theories.

            re:"But why would it do that?"

            Who knows? - For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. [Isaiah 55:9]

            We, as God's people, "walk by faith, not by sight". [2Corinthians 5:7] That's what He asks of us.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 100%

              icelander1 year, 6 months ago

              God could have done that, but why? Why do that when it simply provides evidence that contradicts its "word." Also, where is the evidence of of it? You can't form a theory without evidence.

              "We, as God's people, "walk by faith, not by sight". [2Corinthians 5:7] That's what He asks of us."

              I'm not even sure why I'm responding to someone who values ignorance over knowledge.

              Face it: When it comes to rational thought, your position is untenable. All you have to fall back on is a 1500 year old book of fiction and some happy feelings.

              Reply
          • 100%

            icelander1 year, 6 months ago

            The ability to prove something wrong is what makes science so powerful. Even if a theory has existed for decades it can be overturned if there's new evidence.

            I think you're a victim of poor science education. It takes a lot of evidence to disprove a theory, which is why the ones we've arrived at are so sound.

            Reply
          • 86%

            Sloany1 year, 6 months ago

            Carbon dating may be somewhat unreliable but IT IS NOT 300000000 YEARS OFF.

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

              theoretically, a specimen older than 50,000 years should have too little 14C to measure.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • HmacComment removed: User banned.
              • 100%

                Sloany1 year, 6 months ago

                50000 > 6000

                Reply
      • 83%

        gregis31 year, 6 months ago

        The earth is far older than 6000 years. There are fossils found on a regular basis that are much older than that.

        This is the problem with a strictly literal interpretation of the Bible. Some parts of the Bible are best studied in a literal manner, but others are not. There are many writing styles in the Bible, and we cannot use the same method of studying for every book therein.

        Reply
      • 100%

        relevance1 year, 6 months ago

        There are mountains of scientific evidence that support the age of the earth and universe. It's pretty much a universally accepted scientific theory among life and earth scientists that evolution occurs, and that the age of the universe is over 13 billions years old.

        Yet, despite how universal these theories are, there's still some 700 life and earth scientists (out of 480,000 in the US) that still believe in "creation-science."

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Evidence...

        Why would the Christian God create us in his image, request our salvation through his son, and provide mountains of evidence to essentially oppose his existence?

        Reply

        13 Replies

        • 100%

          mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

          it's not evidence, it's theory. You yourself even state it twice in your post. "...pretty much a universally accepted scientific theory..." and "...despite how universal these theories are..."

          It all boils down to temptation. satan's trying (and very successfully in many cases) to have people disbelieve in God.

          It takes more faith to believe in some of these theories, than it does to just believe God for who He is.

          Reply

          12 Replies

          • 0%

            relevance1 year, 6 months ago

            This is getting redundant.

            You, clearly, do not know the definition of a scientific theory. Remember that going to church and reading religiously biased works will not adequately explain the scientific method anymore than reading the bible would adequately explain our origins. I suggest science courses before posting convoluted opinions about the correlation between evidence and theory.

            There are musical theories, architectural theories, mathematical theories, etc. -- do the methodologies behind some of these theories make the premise false?

            If evidence could never support a theory, we would all believe in some derivation of Christianity and atheism would not exist.

            I'll take Basic Scientific Principles 101, Alex.

            Reply
          • 100%

            relevance1 year, 6 months ago

            If satan was truly trying to "have people disbelieve in God," then that would make God's attempt to garner believers awfully inadequate.

            I must say, satan is a hell of a lot more intelligent than your savior.

            Reply

            10 Replies

            • 0%

              mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

              you have lifted satan above the God of all creation. You have pledged you allegiance to satan, and whether you like it or not, whether you acknowledge it or not, you have become his servant. You make your stand under the covering of "atheist" yet you have chosen a god, and that is satan. Until you break that off of yourself, you will remain his servant. In all your intelligence, you have been deceived. You're running full-time ministry for him. He's found someone who's hunger for "the answer" is unquenchable. As long as he can keep you looking in the direction he's got you looking, he's got a devoted servant in you. You'll NEVER find all the answers in science. Unless you look to Christ, you'll die never knowing the Truth.

              Reply

              9 Replies

              • 100%

                relevance1 year, 6 months ago

                Pledged my allegiance to Satan? Servant of Satan? Chosen Satan as my god? I don't even believe in Satan!!

                Also, once again, I looked to Christ, for many, many years. He is as elusive as your Satan.

                I gave this comment a positive vote for making me laugh so f'in hard.

                Reply

                6 Replies

                • 100%

                  mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

                  to:relevance - What do you think of Richard Dawkins?

                  Reply

                  5 Replies

                  • 100%

                    relevance1 year, 6 months ago

                    What does Richard Dawkins have to do with anything? For Christ's sake man please don't tell me you believe he is satan incarnate.

                    Also, you have a habit of never directly responding to our comments.

                    Reply

                    4 Replies

                    • 13%

                      mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

                      just trying to figure out who your god is...

                      re:"never directly responding to our comments." - look back at the threads. I spend more time with you, icelander and Hmac than anyone. Some of it gets redundant...but hey, look at what we're talking about- religion.

                      Reply

                      3 Replies

                      • 100%

                        relevance1 year, 6 months ago

                        I don't have a god. And even if I did like Richard Dawkins, and indeed I do, that doesn't mean I believe he created the universe.

                        You keep assuming that everybody has to be similar to you (and 90% of the world) and believe in some form of intelligent or divine creation.

                        How about this: The universe and energy it contains is my god.

                        There, I'm no longer an atheist, I'm a univerist.

                        Reply
                      • 88%

                        relevance1 year, 6 months ago

                        When I say 'directly responding', I mean posting a relevant return to the arguments.

                        Accusing satan of being my god is not only irrelevant, but seriously makes me question your sanity.

                        Reply

                        1 Reply

                        • 100%

                          mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

                          it sounds very much like you have chosen to worship the universe - a created thing. You may not like the sound of this, but that makes you an idol worshipper. A pretty primative stand for someone as intelligent as yourself.

                          re: "Accusing satan of being my god..." - I can't "accuse" satan of being your god, because it is by your choice. Wrong word usage. That would be like me "accusing" your boss of being your boss because you have chosen to work for him.

                          By the way, if Richard Dawkins didn't create the universe, who did?

                          Reply
              • 100%

                icelander1 year, 6 months ago

                I don't think you're even a real person. You're just pretending to be a fundie. Nobody could be this delusional.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 100%

                  mikhurst1 year, 6 months ago

                  to:icelander - What do you think of Richard Dawkins?

                  Reply
      • 100%

        Jayson1 year, 6 months ago

        The earth is much older than 6,000 years. I guess I don't understand how that proves god doesn't exist. I've only taken a few logic courses so I'm a beginner at all this.

        Reply
• 0%

  bscarb1 year, 6 months ago

  Satan was actually defeated by the resurrection. Ephesians 1:19-21 tells how the resurrection powerfully defeated Satan and put Christ far above him.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    icelander1 year, 6 months ago

    Yes. And Little Red Riding Hood 1:23 showed how the Woodsman defeated the Big Bad Wolf, cut open its stomach, and freed Granny.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      Sloany1 year, 6 months ago

      ROLF

      Reply