Age of the Earth

[Qyöt27]

I never said there was a "young earth" I think the the earth is old. And NO we don't KNOW how life started.

We do know the process that must have taken place (abiogenesis). What we haven't observed or completely figured out are the precise conditions and circumstances under which abiogenesis happened*. Whether the formation of RNA was what kicked it off or it was something simpler, the point was that organic chemicals started self-replicating, which would eventually lead to cell formation and (a)sexual reproduction as defense mechanisms, and to more and more complex forms of life from there.

*and if we find life on say, Titan or Enceladus, this would require a different set of criteria - as well as be definitive proof of a second genesis - due to the sheer distance from Earth and the dramatically different environments on both of them (particularly Titan).

 

[xpower]

We do know the process that must have taken place (abiogenesis). What we haven't observed or completely figured out are the precise conditions and circumstances under which abiogenesis happened*. Whether the formation of RNA was what kicked it off or it was something simpler, the point was that organic chemicals started self-replicating, which would eventually lead to cell formation and (a)sexual reproduction as defense mechanisms, and to more and more complex forms of life from there.

*and if we find life on say, Titan or Enceladus, this would require a different set of criteria - as well as be definitive proof of a second genesis - due to the sheer distance from Earth and the dramatically different environments on both of them (particularly Titan).

Where is the proof that life spontaneity arose from non-living matter? I believe God started life.

 

[Martinius]

God made the earth for a dwelling place for his creation of humans. A mature earth has all of it's natural resources for men to use. Adam and Eve didn't think it was a joke when they ate the mature fruit from a mature tree.

It is a little funny how you respond to my post without any attempt to answer my questions. I have no problem with you believing whatever myth you want to believe, but please don't require me to jettison any of my God-given intelligence and accept your story.

Also, I am a little concerned about your attitude that God gave us the earth's natural resources "for men to use", implying that they are only for us and that we can do what we want with them. Self-centered thinking like that is why man is abusing God's creation and harming so many life forms, and messing up so many Eco-systems.

I am also at a loss how God would create such a flawed dwelling place for humans, considering all the natural disasters, diseases, and poor climatic conditions we must deal with. It is apparently God's desire to kill off thousands us at random times and in various ways. Why do you think God does that? Is God testing us just like he tested Job? Or perhaps is continuing to use human lives as gambling tokens in wagers with Satan and other Angels?

 

[MerriestHouse]

...

double post

 

[MerriestHouse]

...

triple post

 

[MerriestHouse]

It is a little funny how you respond to my post without any attempt to answer my questions. I have no problem with you believing whatever myth you want to believe, but please don't require me to jettison any of my God-given intelligence and accept your story.

It's not my story. Is what you write your story? Or do you follow someone else?

Also, I am a little concerned about your attitude that God gave us the earth's natural resources "for men to use", implying that they are only for us and that we can do what we want with them. Self-centered thinking like that is why man is abusing God's creation and harming so many life forms, and messing up so many Eco-systems.

We do what we want to do with them. We take trees and make toilet paper and God does not stop us. We use coal, oil, gas, silver, gold . . . . . . . . . . . . Everything we make comes from the earth. All the money you have came from the earth in one form or another. There are abusers of this earth, but using is not always abusing.

I am also at a loss how God would create such a flawed dwelling place for humans, considering all the natural disasters, diseases, and poor climatic conditions we must deal with.

What you call flawed, God called good. God made the earth exactly the way he wanted it. We can whine about it and be miserable, or we can make the best of it and be happy. We are only here for a few years anyway. 100 years is a long time to live on the earth. Surely you can stand it for 100 years.

It is apparently God's desire to kill off thousands us at random times and in various ways. Why do you think God does that? Is God testing us just like he tested Job? Or perhaps is continuing to use human lives as gambling tokens in wagers with Satan and other Angels?

Now who is making up stories?

 

[MerriestHouse]

Although I'm a very liberal Christian, I've found that the Creationists are apparently largely correct about the age of the Earth and about evolution. I don't care much about the topic of evolution. But, if the Earth is fairly young, then evolution shouldn't have much effect anyway. By the age of the Earth I really mean the age of the Earth's surface. The probability is that the Great Flood did deposit nearly all of the sedimentary rock strata a few thousand years ago and the fossils were formed in the strata at that time for the most part. A few hundred years after the Flood, a large asteroid hit the former supercontinent and broke it up and caused rapid continental drift. This moved the northern continents northward, which suddenly froze the animals there and started the Ice Age. The best site about this is http://newgeology.us .

Jesus says that people were there from the beginning of creation. "But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female." Mark 10:5

Jesus was speaking 4,000 years after creation and said that day 6, when humans were created was "the beginning of creation."

He also says "That the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zacharias." Luke 11:50

This generation was the generation Jesus was living in when He spoke. The blood of Abel was the blood of the son of Adam and Eve that was murdered by his brother. The blood of Abel was the first innocent blood to be shed on the earth. That was 6,000 years ago.

Paul said "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

Paul says that people have been able to perceive these attributes of God in His creation ever since the creation of the world. He doesn't say, ever since people were created.

 

[hedrick]

Jesus says that people were there from the beginning of creation. "But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female." Mark 10:5

We shouldn’t have to deal with this kind of absurdity in the liberal discussion group. Please move this discussion somewhere that it is appropriate, such as Origins Theology or one of the conservative areas.

 

[MerriestHouse]

We shouldn’t have to deal with this kind of absurdity in the liberal discussion group. Please move this discussion somewhere that it is appropriate, such as Origins Theology or one of the conservative areas.

Thank you for the helpful advice. I am feeling my way around this forum.

 

[hedrick]

Thank you for the helpful advice. I am feeling my way around this forum.

It's kind of complex. We have discussion forums open to everyone and "safe harbors" for various groups, such as this one. The forums for specific denominations and faith groups are intended to let people talk about issues from within their own context, without having constant attacks from people who disagree. So it's not legitimate, for example, for Protestants to attack Catholic beliefs or practices in the Catholic group, even if those beliefs seem obviously wrong. That's because Catholics deserve a place to talk with other Catholics about things of concern. This is the group for liberals. Outside this "Congregational" category, the groups are mostly open for everyone, or at least all Christians. That's where we normally have discussions about the age of the earth, etc.

This particular topic is an oddity, because it really invited responses like yours. I still don't think that it belongs in this group. The OP was claiming that *as a liberal Christian* he rejects lots of the results of consensus science. This is really unusual, and I'm still curious just how he does that. I'm guessing that you probably wouldn't classify yourself as a liberal Christian. If you would, I'd be interested in further discussion.

 

[MerriestHouse]

It's kind of complex. We have discussion forums open to everyone and "safe harbors" for various groups, such as this one. The forums for specific denominations and faith groups are intended to let people talk about issues from within their own context, without having constant attacks from people who disagree. So it's not legitimate, for example, for Protestants to attack Catholic beliefs or practices in the Catholic group, even if those beliefs seem obviously wrong. That's because Catholics deserve a place to talk with other Catholics about things of concern. This is the group for liberals. Outside this "Congregational" category, the groups are mostly open for everyone, or at least all Christians. That's where we normally have discussions about the age of the earth, etc.

This particular topic is an oddity, because it really invited responses like yours. I still don't think that it belongs in this group. The OP was claiming that *as a liberal Christian* he rejects lots of the results of consensus science. This is really unusual, and I'm still curious just how he does that. I'm guessing that you probably wouldn't classify yourself as a liberal Christian. If you would, I'd be interested in further discussion.

I see. No I am not a liberal Christian and I didn't notice that he started his post out that way until I reread it. Thanks for the invitation to discuss, I will probably take you up on that in the future on other issues. I want to know if I am not following the rules.

 

[hedrick]

Sure. We welcome friendly inquiries. I apologize if my response seemed hostile. I'm just not much interested in the 2000th argument over young earth creationism.

 

[MerriestHouse]

Sure. We welcome friendly inquiries. I apologize if my response seemed hostile. I'm just not much interested in the 2000th argument over young earth creationism.

It did seem that way, and I accept your apology.

 

[Wgw]

I consider that if one is a liberal Christian, like me, one will not object to people adhering to YEC even if one personally, like me, adheres to a theistic model of evolution. I was shocked by the illiberal hostility to the BBC hiring a man who happens to be a creationist to host The Breakfast Programme. Liberalism demands we accept dissenting views even if these seem unreasonable provided they do not amount to agitation to violence or tyranny in the manner of, for example, radical Islam.

 

[KitKatMatt]

I object to YEC, but it has nothing with me being a liberal Christian. It has everything to do with me believing that I shouldn't support people propagating false information and pseudoscience.