You are saying that there was light prior to creation of sun, sure. But at the same time, light needs a source, where was this light coming from? where was the heat coming from? How long was this light there? Was it strong enough to heat up the earth to the proper temperature? You can't just say "light". Light needs to be coming from somewhere, its literally waves and particles or photons.
Its not compatible with the "Christian" creationism which is what people mean when they talk about "creationism". I don't believe the biblical creationism is compatible with science either. But its not the biblical one i believe in, now is it?
Ew whats with that article? You know endospores are a thing right? Bacteria form spores and stay in that stage for thousands of years if the environment doesn't fit them and will stay like that until it finally does fit them. You can know the reason behind spore formation by studying the spore and also its age.
Considering that science managed to also produce militant atheists like Richard Dawkins who would go out of their way to discredit creationism, I highly doubt it.
That's all I wanted to know. We have different outlooks here and that's fine. I chose my beliefs for a different reason and if adhering to Hebrews 11:1 makes me a fool to you that's ok.
I don't know . . . But I would assume that it must have taken on whatever attributes required for it to sustain life at that point. There are other examples of supernaturally-induced phenomena in the OT. All hinges on whether you believe in it or not obviously but it's not like the creation of the world would've been the only supernatural event that occurred according to the bible because it was fictionalized and that's how the writers in their ignorance believed the world came to be. There are several other "miracles" that God performed that even at the time went against what the people knew should be possible in the natural realm. God used these sort of things on several occasions to inspire faith in His people.
Huh? You're saying that the bible says there was light, water (the waters existed before through), vegetation then animals then man but a few verses later says that "man was created and after that vegetation was"? I don't quite understand? If you meant "after the vegetation was" then the order is correct isn't it?
Uh no. Many scientists reject the idea of a supreme being altogether, not just the Christian version. Richard Dawkins for example was accused of Islamaphobia for his views.
Every profession has defensive douches, and controversial topics make money whether its richard dawkins or david woods lol
To acquire truth unsullied by desire is a fallacy.
1 Corinthians 2:14
Do you expect me to go and decipher that verse in order to get the answer lmao
I've given answers to whatever the "young earthers" put forward and so has everyone else. You have yet to put a compelling argument forward and you continue discarding whatever evidence you get that goes against the bible, such as the very existence of endospores.
I think this discussion has more or less shifted to an origins debate. I think it will have been very much worthwhile if it prompts people to recognise that there are definitely more than one scientifically based view of origins out there.
I thought it was fairly straightforward but I did add the answer after it.
I'm not asking about Christianity or your belief, i'm asking what if I worshipped the sun. If I had believed that the Sun was God despite the fact that you proved it to me that a ball of gas can't be God and did not create me, what would you call my faith?
Thats where you are wrong, no evidence "strongly" suggests the biblical creation model. The very sources you've quoted don't either. You and Axl quoted the same man to me providing me with articles but in those articles he uses the words "Somehow God carried the water over the earth". That doesn't sound like evidence to me.
"Foolish" Manama. For the third time.
A good assertion to cross examine! I am comfortably in disagreement with you here ;-)
Abiogenesis theory got disproven by Pasteur ages ago unless you are talking specifically about the dead earth coming to life and giving rise to life. Which you shouldn't because even the Genesis talks about earth being originally dead with no life until God sent water to it.
Abiogenesis without the hand of a creator is an unbridgeable gap, however old the earth is ;-)