I just wanted to tell you that I think what you did at Parkview was very brave. I admire you so much for standing up for what you believe in, especially in front of people you knew were against it. I attended the Sunday 11 o’clock service (I actually shook your hand but you probably wouldn’t remember me), listened to both the other services, and loved hearing what you had to say. It is hard sometimes, especially now that I’m in college, to talk freely of religion without hurting others feelings. You were tactful and polite in your speech and careful not to offend anyone…at least that was how I felt. I am so glad that you came to our church. Now I have such a greater understanding of Atheism. I actually understand my friends who are Atheist when they say they “don’t believe in God” and that there is a difference between “there is no God.” If you ever need a friendly christian to talk to, feel free to give me an e-mail. Hopefully, I’ll see you again at Parkview soon.

Hilary Hope

Just one thought reading through and that is as follows:
The whole “missionary/babies” thing places way too much emphasis on the heaven/hell issue, I think. If we reduce Christianity and the person of Christ to just an eTicket to heaven, I think we miss much of the heart of what God intended. True Christianity, not as lived out by “Christians” but as taught and lived out by Jesus Christ himself, is the best way to live life, I would contend, and the whole heaven thing is a nice bonus.

I think it’s fascinating that one would find a meaningful distinction between those two words.

I think its sad there is a meaningful distinction between those words. But unfortunately, there are many who call themselves “believers” walking this world unable to demonstrate the most elemental evidence of a changed life. Their fruit is rotten, and they make it stink everywhere they go.

Rather than respond to each of the verses you have quoted and try to explain, I would suggest you do an intellectual study, study the words in context (extremely important). Study as a professor might; discovering where, when (and was it before the new covenant of Jesus or after, because that makes a huge difference) and why the words were stated. Plucking a sentence or two from any large book and trying to understand what was meant can be difficult. I struggled the most, when I became a Christian, (as an educated adult, I chose Jesus/Christianity), with the holocast victims going to hell after all they had suffered, and studied tremendously to understand the Bible had to say about such issues.I’ve also done studies (with good, educated teachers) that combine the known history of the time with the Bible verses as they were written. It’s amazing to discover how much of written history coincides with the Bible and the people in it. It was after much study that I was able to understand the Bible and it’s teachings and learned that I can’t cherry pick the verses I like and tear out the pages that make me uncomfortable. At that point, I have to accept by faith and my limited earthy brain that I can either accept God/Jesus/Bible entirely or reject it all entirely. Obviously, I accepted. I was raised in a home where my mother lived by her horoscope and palm readings and psychics and my step-father became a scientologist; the Bible wasn’t forced down my throat. I was very much the doubting Thomas that needed something real and concrete and I found it. Give it a shot (an intellectual study) and see what you discover.

I just finished listening to the entire series and I think you did a incredible job throughout. Kudos. It really was a feelgood conversation and a pleasure to listen to. The second and the third sections really flowed smoothly.

Although you did a great job of separating the Big Bang and abiogenesis from evolution, I think defending evolution is where you have the most room to improve. Pastor Tim asserted that DNA evidence points to God but did not elaborate. A simple way to explain why DNA evidence supports evolution is to talk about how scientists are able to establish a relationship between a parent and a child based on shared DNA and using those same methods scientists are able to identify the relationships between different animals. But what is really important is that the genetic evidence confirmed what scientists had predicted through our understanding of evolution. It is really important to follow up with the prediction element because, like I mentioned earlier, a testable prediction is what makes evolution scientific and ID/Creationism dogmatic.

David

Geologic dating (radiometric dating) was first done in 1907 and is now a pretty standard and well-worked out technique; you can read more about it at this USGS site, which (besides describing the history of development of radiometric dating and describing how it’s done) also gives a list of 14 examples of geologic samples. Thirteen of the 14 examples they give date back beyond 6000 years. Four of the examples they give date back more than 1,000,000 years. The information on that page may help direct further inquiry, if you’re concerned that someone must be falsifying information. (The more independent corroboration, the more likely the information is reliable…)

In case you’re interested, I (a skeptic) tried searching Google Scholar for the terms: radiometric dating criticism (results are here). You’re welcome to go look at the list of 720 papers which met these search criteria, but unfortunately it seems to be a well-enough established scientific method that the criticisms are about more picky details than whether or not radiometric dating is false.

I guess the other major potential explanation for the repeated findings of rocks older than 6000 years on the earth is that God put the rocks and fossils there 6000 years ago specifically including various levels of radiation decay so that it would seem to any future scientists that the rocks and fossils were older than 6000 years, when really they aren’t. That would take omniscience and omnipotence, for sure! Not to mention some sneakiness, imo.

Are scientists not ever wrong? They have been wrong so many times about so many things. Why would I believe that they really have a 3.4 billion year old microbe when just a decade ago they were telling people that it’s fat grams, not calories or sugar, that make people fat. Many of the scientists’ vaccines have been dangerous and so called medicinal cures have been deadly. Furthermore, how MANY studies have been proven to have been falsified by scientists for personal or corporate gain. These and so many other reasons are why I can dismiss a “scientist” stating that they’ve dated a microbe to be older than intelligent design or creationism states the earth is old. “Educated” people in all of history have been found to be foolish and wrong, some scientists and some
Christians. The title “scientist” does not make a study by such an individual a
complete truth. I’ve learned in over 40 years of education and life experience to
take what “scientists” say with a grain of salt and a “wait and see” attitude. You never know who’s just publishing something for publicity, truth or no truth.