Even Pat Robertson Denies the Earth is 6,000 Years Old!!!!

Well my goodness. Good for him!
shinyblurrysays...

There are plenty of theists who believe in an old age of the Earth; however, they have to compromise scripture in a big way to get it to work. Also, and I've said this before, I used to be a firm believer in an old age of the Earth, but I changed my mind because of the evidence, not in spite of it. I had always believed there was very good evidence proving it was true, as that was the way I was taught and raised. I found out this was not so, or even close to it, and when I found out I would have to put more faith in the assumptions being made than I would in the bible, I chose to put my faith in scripture. I am fairly sure most of the people of this site were at the place I used to be, believing it because that is what is taught in school and mirrored endlessly in the culture. You see it in movies, books, televisions show, reinforcing it over and over again. But when I took the time to understand the actual evidence I found that they have taken some very big leaps of faith, completely unjustified, and actually contrary to the evidence that they find.

bareboards2says...

Hey, @shinyblurry, do you even know what Pat Robertson is referencing here?

Some guy added up all the begats in the Bible and worked his way back to Adam and Eve. That is your biblical basis? That is what you would have to "compromise scripture" in order to accept an older age?

Oh dear.

Well, I shall take comfort that Pat Robertson is not rejecting science, and that the Vatican has priests devoted to studying actual science, and let you and your fellow "believers" have your "beliefs."

Oh dear.

shinyblurrysays...

They have to compromise a lot more than just that. A whole host of problems arise when you try to cram billions of years into scripture. There are implications for everything from the sin of Adam to the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ. Here is a good list:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/why-christians-shouldnt-accept-millions

As I said, I've investigated these issues thoroughly. I was initially willing to compromise the bible because I strongly believed in these ideas. I was prompted though to investigate the evidence and what I found appalled me. As I said, I became a young earth creationist because of the evidence, not in spite of it.

bareboards2said:

Hey, @shinyblurry, do you even know what Pat Robertson is referencing here?

Some guy added up all the begats in the Bible and worked his way back to Adam and Eve. That is your biblical basis? That is what you would have to "compromise scripture" in order to accept an older age?

Oh dear.

Well, I shall take comfort that Pat Robertson is not rejecting science, and that the Vatican has priests devoted to studying actual science, and let you and your fellow "believers" have your "beliefs."

Oh dear.

chingalerasays...

Bareboards, yer attempt at proselytizing to a choir of one with this post...give it UP!
Get a job, dude?!
Either that or donate a healthy heart in a Styrofoam box marked, "LIVE HUMAN ORGAN" to Jebeezus?!

ChaosEnginesays...

Fuck Pat Robertson. One tiny moment of sanity does not make up for any of the vile shit he's spread over the years.

Oh and "Michelle"? Maybe spend a bit more time worrying about your kids in *this* life....

CreamKsays...

Funny, i come from a background where young earth was a fact taught to me. By the time i was 10, the overwhelming evidence pointed towards at least hundreds of thousands of years and by the time i was 15, the whole thing was over for me. The church i was in, changed it's views (maybe the only thing they've admitted..) but that was after i was long gone. So i know young earth theories pretty well and they are all bullshit.

Let me ask you this, if creation is such big part of the bible, why does that story only last two pages? It's very vague and cryptic, the subtle changes between two different languages in those very first words allow all kinds of theories in them and i'm not talking about translations that are changing text deliberately, i'm talking about "honest to god" verbatim translations. Believing that Earth is old is not blasphemy. Believing that earth is young and then cherry picking the rest of the book as you wish.. That is the real blasphemy. If your Young Earth believer, you are also believing that owning of slaves is good etc all that stuff that you don't believe in. You can't say that one part is absolute truth taken literally and the next is not.

shinyblurrysaid:

There are plenty of theists who believe in an old age of the Earth; however, they have to compromise scripture in a big way to get it to work. Also, and I've said this before, I used to be a firm believer in an old age of the Earth, but I changed my mind because of the evidence, not in spite of it. I had always believed there was very good evidence proving it was true, as that was the way I was taught and raised. I found out this was not so, or even close to it, and when I found out I would have to put more faith in the assumptions being made than I would in the bible, I chose to put my faith in scripture. I am fairly sure most of the people of this site were at the place I used to be, believing it because that is what is taught in school and mirrored endlessly in the culture. You see it in movies, books, televisions show, reinforcing it over and over again. But when I took the time to understand the actual evidence I found that they have taken some very big leaps of faith, completely unjustified, and actually contrary to the evidence that they find.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More