Yep, real science, real research. Yep, I can see it now, Koala Bears hitching a ride on a raft to Australasia with very lost kangaroos.
She said it was related to Newton’s Laws of Motion, which were explained. But still.
Billions of trees down, and not one rammed into the wooden ark.
1 Like
Nobody debates math class.
You’ve obviously never been to any of my geometry classes! But that is tongue-in-cheek. I know what you mean. More seriously, though, we don’t see any mathematicians making a name for themselves by showing that the field of mathematics is inherently anti-religious or anti-theistic. If there were and enough people were taking them seriously, then you can bet debates would have found their way into math class.
From a (now old) edition of a chemistry text published by a Christian publisher:
While unsaved scientists wonder what strong nuclear forces are, Christians have an authoritative source of information about this seeming mystery. Colossians 1:17 reveals that Jesus Christ “is before all things, and by him all things consist.” God is ultimately responsible for holding all the protons in all the atoms of this world together.
So there you have it. Scientists can all just go home now.
[In fairness to the publisher, that paragraph is no longer in their more recent editions of the same book.]
Regarding the marbles, I’d never heard anyone glossing over Newton’s second law of motion by just retreating to the mantra: God does it! I mean … inertia and so many other things are at their core still going to be mysterious. So the sentiment is always there to celebrate, but for some of us that celebration involves poking around and trying to see just a bit deeper and reveling in the mathematical regularity of it all.
I have never seen such a textbook like this. This would never fly in Catholic High Schools in NJ/NY.
Perhaps I’m naive, Brad, but I would not expect such a concocted explanation to actually be apart of the Creation Museum’s display.
Why would koala bears (or any animal for that matter) even attempt trying to cross on something as sketchy as a floating bridge? Not only that, but do so for hundreds of miles… At least with the ark scenario you have Noah doing the guiding… Who’s guiding this animal migration, to go against their natural instincts, and climb sketchy floating bridges?
-Tim
@TimothyHicks
I have heard about land bridges before. It’s very fascinating. What is your opinion on when these land bridges were in existence, and how long do you think they lasted before the ocean covered them up?
“My opinion” is just to defer to current conventional wisdom among those who are in the best position to know. So I see no reason to question the 14 -15 ky dating of South American civilization that then pushes any initial land bridge migration to at least that far back as well. Obviously I have no stake in trying to stick to a young-earth script in all this. Regarding how long any such land bridge may have hung around … till the end of the last ice age maybe? With melting ice and rising sea levels, it would make sense if it got submerged then.
I have never seen such a textbook like this. This would never fly in Catholic High Schools in NJ/NY.
Well, obviously it didn’t in this publication either. Somebody probably made a stink and they took it out. Most of us are just amused when we read such things and don’t worry about it much.
Not really, Noah couldn’t do much guiding with no rudder on the ark. Noah and family just bobbing on the waves. Compare this with what the Egyptians had in the Red Sea 4600 years ago to move supplies for the building of the pyramids. 80 ft wooden barges carrying about 20 men and supplies. That was state-of-the-art in the Red Sea then. These barges would certain not be able to survive at sea for one years in terrible sea states. They would be ripped to pieces. The Egyptians had a whole economy built to build the pyramids with copper coming from mines in the Sinai. Contrast that with Noah and his sons building a 500 ft boat without a rudder for a years’ voyage with all those animals.
I am getting this info from an excellent article in this month’s Scientific American. One of the key points made in the article is that the whole economy from 2575 to 2545 BC was geared to making pyramids. Interesting finds is that it wasn’t a slave economy but a skilled labor force economy as well as national management. (Puts the Exodus and Moses story in jeopardy). How was the Pharaoh able unite all of Egypt to build pyramids, whereas Mesopotamia was who ruled by dozens of small city states with each with their own Kings and gods didn’t unite? This article says that because the Pharoah was god and the people wanted to work directly for the Pharoah/god whereas Mesopotamia each King has their own god who the king was in direct contact with. Interesting.
Perhaps they built tiny koala-arks and packed away enough eucalyptus leaves for the voyage.
1 Like
Hey Patrick. Miscommunication here. I should have said something like “gathering”. In other words Noah gathered all the animals since the animals would not come of their accord. In the theory that animals migrated across the ocean on floating tree logs, my question was why? Did theirs minds get controlled?
In regards to Exodus, some have speculated that the number of people was exaggerated that left Egypt. The thing I don’t understand is that the text says 600,000 fighting men left Egypt — which leads to an estimate of 2 1/2 million people in total. And yet the Egyptians that chased them was 600 Egyptian chariots. From the text the children of Israel behave as if they are outnumbered, yet they have a considerable sized army: 1,000 times that of the Egyptians at least… Despite the weapons or armor that they carried, the Israelites could easily have fought back.
I watched a 40 minute documentary about the Exodus called The Exodus Revealed, which I thought to be pretty interesting.
-Tim
The main problem I have with the Exodus is that Egyptian records make no mention of it - nothing. Here is a nation with a Pharoah-god building pyramids with a writing system that recorded everything as well had seals and certifications for everything. No mention of the Israelites. That is really strange. Unless of course the Isrealites could have made up the story and amplified its significance as they were an really insignificant group at the time considering Egypt, Mesopotamia, India and China.
Have you ever heard of the Pythagoreans? They were an odd group. They practically worshipped numbers, specifically the number ten, which they called the “Tetratryks”. Part of their belief was that everything could be expressed as a fraction. When squareroots came along, and people pondered what number (or ratio) the side length of a equilateral square that got folded from corner to corner … How long would the long side be? The answer is the squareroot of 2… An irrational number that can’t be expressed as a fraction.
Whether legend, folklore, or true story, the Pythagoreans didn’t like this idea and had the man killed.
A somewhat dark yet strangely amusing story.
-Tim
Honestly Patrick, I wouldn’t expect Egyptian to make mention of it. If the Exodus is true then it’s a rather embarrassing account for the Egyptians to make mention of in stone. It’s sort like America’s “Banana Wars” … It doesn’t put America in a favorable light, so Americans don’t teach it in History Class.
Though I’m a Christian it’s difficult for me to tell how much of the story is true and how much of is “pizzazz” or “literary decoration”. Peter Enns makes the point that where other Egyptian Kings and Pharoahs are mentioned, their names are given, which for the most part are historically accurate. The curious thing about the Exodus is that no name is provided, even though they were under enslavement for 400 years. Did the Israelites forget his name?
Another curiosity is that it says they were enslaved and subject to hard bondage in Egypt, yet countless times in the narrative the children of Israel complain about their situation and wish to go back to Egypt. Their enslavement must not have been too grueling if they wanting to go back… Maybe something deeper is going on here.
If you watch the documentary you’ll see that there is evidence of an asiatic group dwelling Egypt. There’s also deep-sea divers that dive into the bottom of the Red Sea, where it’s most likely they would have crossed, and found coral reefs that are growing around objects that appear to be man-made… Objects that appear to be in the shape of wheels and axels.
-Tim
I was homeschooled since I was eight and prior to that I went to a private school. During homeschool we used a computer program called Switched On Schoolhouse (SOS for short). There was a distinct Bible Subject and Science Subject, and the two didn’t intertwine.
While I definitely don’t recall being taught anything about evolution, I don’t remember Newtonian physics being taught in that fashion either … I.e., “God did it” …
-Tim
Some customers evidently like having references to God and the Bible on every page. My favorite was a woman who found it very edifying that next to the explanation of the order of operations in her kid’s math book was the verse 1 Cor 14:33a “God is not a God of disorder…” Never mind that the verse they quoted was about speaking in tongues during the assembly.
Well apparently I’ve been using that verse out of context myself! I always used it as an argument against the idea that God would speed up light from the stars, early in the Creation, so that we could see them.
My bad 
-Tim
1 Like
I’m not sure why this would bother you, christy? The idea that God cannot be separated from any single part of reality, that He is Lord of all, that nothing is out of his sight, nor out of his control… why is that so wrong to point out? Especially if it is made clear that Newton’s Laws of Motion were really God’s laws of Motion, the way God made things, the natural laws that God created. It seems strange that any christian would be upset by this type of approach. Of course, if the laws of motion were denied, that would be something entirely different and unacceptable, but that does not seem to be the case. So why so upset? Why so skeptical?
Timothy, I think you are misunderstanding what they are explaining about plate tectonics, etc. This is not “added to the story” as if it was in scripture. Nor is it given the credibility of scripture. It is merely brought forth as a plausible explanation for how the global flood might have happened. If in your mind this is an addition to scripture, then the evolutionary theory (especially by TE people) is also an addition to scripture. It too tries to explain nature created by God, although in a much different way.
Good catch there, John. I can see your reasoning here. Maybe I should clarify my meaning here.
The consensus of Church History, in general, as I understand it, interpreted Noah and the Flood as a Global Event. Since the rise of scientific understanding… Such as plate tectonics, geology, fossils etc., have been widely accepted recently, then we have thus “added more detail to the flood account based on scientific knowledge” … Would that perhaps be more accurate of a claim?
Some Christians went in that direction, while others viewed the scientific understanding and the Global Flood premise as incompatible — and thus changed the way they view the flood. Either opting for a local flood event or a more theological flood event.
In the case of evolutionary theory, I don’t think most people have “added on this detail” to Scripture, as it has “changed the outlook on what Scripture talks about”… I don’t think most EC people believe that Scripture endorses or talks about evolutionary theory, but rather Scripture (in the case of Genesis 1) discusses other things… Like spiritual realities expressed in allegorical representations. This not a new viewpoint, as others have taken this viewpoint prior. It could also be historical realities with figuritive embellishments.
So the flood model has been adjusted in accordance with recent scientific research … Whether a localized flood for the people who view the scientific discipline as incompatible or a (still) global flood, with ideas of fossilization within the layers, and mountains that rise because of the deluge, as well as continents that gets separated — Am I incorrect in my assertion here?
In any case, thanks for calling me out on a slightly illogic misstep. I’ll try and be clearer next time.
-Tim