The Age of the Earth and the People of Og

[Jimmy Higgins]

The People of Og are a very curious people. Scientifically, they are surpassed by no one. Unfortunately, they have not been exposed to the Old or New Testament. Free of any previous connotations, the People of Og are to set foot into the discovery of the age of the earth. What will they discover and how will they discover that age?
You may assume that any discovery to date will be found by them.

[Socratism]

Today @ 11:30 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46157#post46157)
Jimmy Higgins:

The People of Og are a very curious people. Scientifically, they are surpassed by no one. Unfortunately, they have not been exposed to the Old or New Testament. Free of any previous connotations, the People of Og are to set foot into the discovery of the age of the earth. What will they discover and how will they discover that age?
You may assume that any discovery to date will be found by them.

I think you have made a very important point.

The creator of the universe as well as human life is very intelligent and quite perceptive (to say the least).

He certainly was aware that if mankind disobeyed Him that it would be inevitable that as memory of Him faded (because after their banishment they would no longer be in daily communion with Him), ideas would arise regarding how things got the way they were. The universe and life testify to the glory of God, but perverse humans, perhaps led astray by spiritual antagonists, could come up with alternate scenarios that might appeal to men who were in rebellion to God.

Therefore God acted in two ways. First He originally designed the universe and life with that in mind. Second, He instructed selected individuals and inspired them to write down a simple account of what He had done so that it would be available in the future to those who loved and trusted Him. Later the accounts were gathered together and edited into a single book we now call "Genesis" which means Beginnings.

Those that love God and believe what He said are then able to look at the record of nature and see clearly the handiwork of God. Those that hate God are blinded by their rebellion and devise clever stories of creation in which God has no part. Today these enemies of God have gained sway in the world, as they did before the Deluge, and have persuaded many of the elect that God had no part in creation and the stories in the Bible are myths written by fallible men.

Those of us who believe God are able to recognize the clues left in the record of nature that put the lie to the cleverly devised stories of those who hate God.

That is the purpose of forums like this: to convince the wavering elect that they are being deluded and intimidated by the enemies of God into believing the lie of evolution that denies the glorious works of an almighty God.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today @ 11:51 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46182#post46182)
Socratism:
I think you have made a very important point.Thanks. Now would you care to actually respond to the question I asked?

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 04:51 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46182#post46182)
Socratism:
Those that hate God are blinded by their rebellion and devise clever stories of creation in which God has no part.

Seriously for a moment - do you think that atheists genuinely and consciously hate god?

I have no intention of de-railing this thread, but I've heard so many people come up with this remark and get away with it unchallenged.

Paul

[wienerdog]

I suspect they would discover two things: first, the universe was created about 15 billion years ago; and second, no significant degree of biological evolution has taken place.

[tgamble]

The really sad thing is that you actually believe this drivel.

:argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:

[i]Today @ 04:51 PM
The creator of the universe as well as human life is very intelligent and quite perceptive (to say the least).

He certainly was aware that if mankind disobeyed Him that it would be inevitable that as memory of Him faded (because after their banishment they would no longer be in daily communion with Him), ideas would arise regarding how things got the way they were. The universe and life testify to the glory of God, but perverse humans, perhaps led astray by spiritual antagonists, could come up with alternate scenarios that might appeal to men who were in rebellion to God.

Therefore God acted in two ways. First He originally designed the universe and life with that in mind. Second, He instructed selected individuals and inspired them to write down a simple account of what He had done so that it would be available in the future to those who loved and trusted Him. Later the accounts were gathered together and edited into a single book we now call "Genesis" which means Beginnings.

Those that love God and believe what He said are then able to look at the record of nature and see clearly the handiwork of God. Those that hate God are blinded by their rebellion and devise clever stories of creation in which God has no part. Today these enemies of God have gained sway in the world, as they did before the Deluge, and have persuaded many of the elect that God had no part in creation and the stories in the Bible are myths written by fallible men.

Those of us who believe God are able to recognize the clues left in the record of nature that put the lie to the cleverly devised stories of those who hate God.

That is the purpose of forums like this: to convince the wavering elect that they are being deluded and intimidated by the enemies of God into believing the lie of evolution that denies the glorious works of an almighty God.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today @ 02:13 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46242#post46242)
wienerdog:

I suspect they would discover two things: first, the universe was created about 15 billion years ago; and second, no significant degree of biological evolution has taken place. Well, they proved evolution 100 years ago, the People of Og did.
:cool:
Just kidding.

More to the point, the issue alone is the age of the earth and why they'll find it to be the age they conclude. Why will they conclude the universe is that old?

[Socratism]

Today @ 02:50 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46267#post46267)
Jimmy Higgins:

Well, they proved evolution 100 years ago, the People of Og did.
:cool:
Just kidding.

More to the point, the issue alone is the age of the earth and why they'll find it to be the age they conclude. Why will they conclude the universe is that old?

I think the record shows that essentially all cultures back into the dim recesses of history have concluded that the Earth is either ancient or eternal (Except cultures based on the Holy Scriptures where we are told differently.)

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today @ 03:34 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46300#post46300)
Socratism:
I think the record shows that essentially all cultures back into the dim recesses of history have concluded that the Earth is either ancient or eternal (Except cultures based on the Holy Scriptures where we are told differently.)
Perhaps I'm being misunderstood, my bad.

The People of Og are entering the question with no theory at all. They don't know if it was made yesterday or 15 trillion years ago. They will perform experiments and use technology to determine the age of the earth. Being so advanced, they can come up with anything that has been demonstrated in the present.

So I ask again, what will their scientific conclusion be and what will it be based on?

[Alien]

Today @ 01:34 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46300#post46300)
Socratism:
I think the record shows that essentially all cultures back into the dim recesses of history have concluded that the Earth is either ancient or eternal (Except cultures based on the Holy Scriptures where we are told differently.)

I'm a little puzzled. Here Socratism suggests that scientific investigation of the age of the Earth has always disagreed with a Biblical "young Earth" interpretation. (And I have a feeling, though he hasn't addressed it, that he believes the People of Oq would come to the same conclusion).

But, here ....

Those of us who believe God are able to recognize the clues left in the record of nature that put the lie to the cleverly devised stories of those who hate God.

.... he seems to be saying that there is evidence in nature that supports the young Earth theory.

There seem to be two possibilities:

1. That scientists are all stupid and always have been, and

2. That God deliberately misled us when He set up the universe.

(1) seems unlikely, and (2) makes God a liar.

(Before someone accuses me of creating a false dichotomy, I guess there could be two other possibilities. The whole thing could be some kind of test or there's no such God anyway. The former seems odd to me (what would be the purpose for such an elaborate hoax?). The latter denies one of the basic premises of the discussion, so we should probably exclude it.)

[Woman]

Jimmy asks:
The People of Og are a very curious people. Scientifically, they are surpassed by no one. Unfortunately, they have not been exposed to the Old or New Testament. Free of any previous connotations, the People of Og are to set foot into the discovery of the age of the earth. What will they discover and how will they discover that age?
You may assume that any discovery to date will be found by them

The Ogorians, presuming they are pure scientists, would likely examine the geological record, turn their astronomers toward the Cosmos, their physicists, archeologists, paleontologists, zoologists, et al to their respective areas of expertise and conclude that the earth is somewhere between a few hundred million to a few billion years old.

The thing is though, that unless the folks of Og had no history of their own, it would be impossible for them to come to the question without bias, tradition and at least theoretical explanations of their own beginnings. Such is our dilemma.

[Socrates]

Socratism:

Those that hate God are blinded by their rebellion and devise clever stories of creation in which God has no part.
lordsnooty asked:Seriously for a moment - do you think that atheists genuinely and consciously hate god?
What Socratism or I think is immaterial. What matters is what God has revealed in His Word, and I have discussed that elsewhere. In Romans 1:

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities— his eternal power and divine nature— have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator— who is forever praised. Amen.

Whether atheists hate God presently, the above passage makes it clear that atheism is the result of a WILLING rejection of the true God.

BTW Jimmy, I thought the people of Og actually lived in Bashan and were wiped out by Moses (Numbers 21:33 ff.)

And to get back to the thread topic, I think this is well answered by The earth: how old does it look? (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/docs/v23n1_earth_how_old.asp)

[Socratism]

Today @ 04:02 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46315#post46315)
Jimmy Higgins:

The People of Og are entering the question with no theory at all. They don't know if it was made yesterday or 15 trillion years ago. They will perform experiments and use technology to determine the age of the earth. Being so advanced, they can come up with anything that has been demonstrated in the present.

So I ask again, what will their scientific conclusion be and what will it be based on?

The problem with your scenario is that you are implicitly assuming there is no such thing as a spiritual world and spiritual entities. St. Paul states that we fight not only against flesh and blood but also proncipalities and powers in high places, i.e. the spiritual realm. If that is true then your scenario has no applicability in the world we live in.

If those who speculate about origins as their main occupation do not believe in God (and surveys show this to be true) then they will almost by definition come up with solutions that support an evolutionary timescale. The rest of the scientists simply take the "expert's word for it".

A further factor is that Sunday Schools teach the stories in the Bible as simplistic children's tales. Naturally when we grow up we discard these simple fables for the fables of people we admire: scientists.

The answer to your question is that no one can really say, because this world has no experience with scientific studies that are done by cybernetic beings who are devoid of background leanings and biases.

In my own case I believed the scientific fable of origins from the time I stopped believing in the Bible until I examined the evidence in detail many years later and was stunned by the lack of a scientific foundation for the theory that all life descended from a primitive replicating molecule. Since this had to have billions of years to operate, it is not surprising that clever humans would be able to devise arguments for such a span of time. For example, most evolutionists already believed in unimaginably long ages prior to the invention of techniques such as radioactive dating. Since this method is notoriously unreliable, necessitating discarding dates which do not "fit" the accepted timescale, there is no way to falsify it.

[Woman]

Regarding the Og people who have never heard of the Bible.

Socratism:
The problem with your scenario is that you are implicitly assuming there is no such thing as a spiritual world and spiritual entities.

I think you have completely misunderstood the exercise. The only assumption is that the Og are not going to be swayed by the Genesis creation story.

Socratism:
A further factor is that Sunday Schools teach the stories in the Bible as simplistic children's tales. Naturally when we grow up we discard these simple fables...

Really? Would you care to elaborate? I think the problem is that many people don't ever grow past the children's story stage. Then they become angry when others do.

[Tycho]

Yesterday @ 06:11 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=46461#post46461)
Socratism:
The problem with your scenario is that you are implicitly assuming there is no such thing as a spiritual world and spiritual entities.
The problem is that you're not answering the question of the OP. Unless you think that Casper the Friendly Ghost and his friend Sadako are somehow important observations regarding the age of the Earth, there's really no reason for you to bring this up.

If those who speculate about origins as their main occupation do not believe in God (and surveys show this to be true) then they will almost by definition come up with solutions that support an evolutionary timescale. The rest of the scientists simply take the "expert's word for it".
I do hope that you've been clued in before, but Christians are not all anti-science. Many of them, like their non-Christian counterparts, are capable of making scientific observations and coming up with scientific theories. Also, please keep in mind that science is a little bit more rigorous than speculation and that it's a geologic timescale. Yeesh, your statement might as be written as follows:If those who speculate about nuclear power as their main occupation do not believe in God, (and surveys show this to be true), then they will almost by definition come up with solutions that support an atomic timescale. The rest of the scientists take the "expert's word for it."
A further factor is that Sunday Schools teach the stories in the Bible as simplistic children's tales. Naturally when we grow up we discard these simple fables for the fables of people we admire: scientists.
Plate tectonics is definitely my favorite fable, with the story of how electron degeneracy supports white dwarfs from gravitational collapse coming is as a close second (Grimm's Fairy Tales Mark II). However, the one about quantum tunneling is just a bit too scary for kids under the age of 12, by my reckoning.

The answer to your question is that no one can really say, because this world has no experience with scientific studies that are done by cybernetic beings who are devoid of background leanings and biases.
Peer review can often minimize the effect of personal bias. So, will you be answering the question anytime soon?

In my own case I believed the scientific fable of origins from the time I stopped believing in the Bible until I examined the evidence in detail many years later and was stunned by the lack of a scientific foundation for the theory that all life descended from a primitive replicating molecule. Since this had to have billions of years to operate, it is not surprising that clever humans would be able to devise arguments for such a span of time. For example, most evolutionists already believed in unimaginably long ages prior to the invention of techniques such as radioactive dating. Since this method is notoriously unreliable, necessitating discarding dates which do not "fit" the accepted timescale, there is no way to falsify it.
So, do you need spirits to figure out the age of the Earth, or will the scientific evidence do? Once again, please note that it's a geological timescale, not especially dependant on biology. And what's wrong with radioactivity? Does it contradict your religious beliefs or will you be collecting a Nobel prize after demonstrating that the weak nuclear force is mysteriously unreliable specifically when using its effects to test the age of the Earth (or anything else the Bible may be interpretted to speak of)?