Young earth creationist needing info here...

[Mikecpking]

My story goes from accepting a Theistic Evolution origin, to discovering Intelligent Design via Lee Stroebel's book "The Case for a Creator" to studying William Dembski, Stephen Meyers, Jonathan Wells, Michael Behe's books, to studying alternative books from Richard Dawkins and after almost accepting Evolution, studying Jonathan Sarfati's works...including his books "Refuting Evolution 1, 2, Refuting Compromise and By Design. I studied Kurt Wise's works on Catastrophic Plate Tectonics and this further convinced me that a Young Earth was a viable option. Russell Humphreys' model on the origins firmly put me over the edge on White Hole Cosmology and I have been a Young Earth advocate ever since, also encouraging a Science friend of mine to accept a Young Earth along the way. Some other good references can be found at www.creationontheweb.org

There evidence for catastrophic plate tectonics does not add up and the geological record does not allow for single universal flood or a one time mass extinction.
Rather than read books, treat yourself to a geology course with field work and you will get a more accurate picture. I did.

 

[hamashiachagape]

Again, the age of the earth does not affect whether or not man was created. Nor does it necessitate a "modification" of Adam.

I agree with that. But I think there are other reasons to accept a Young Earth.

 

[hamashiachagape]

There evidence for catastrophic plate tectonics does not add up and the geological record does not allow for single universal flood or a one time mass extinction.
Rather than read books, treat yourself to a geology course with field work and you will get a more accurate picture. I did.

I've certainly had the opportunity to take a share of Science courses in college . Sorry my friend..I learned more from the books.

By the way...thats quite a statement to be made against a Geologist from Harvard of the caliber of Kurt Wise. You might wish to run by us or maybe even him, how the Geological record does not allow for a single universal flood or how catastrophic plate tectonics "don't add up." . You know...I'm sure theres gotta be some other reason he might accept this understanding of plate tectonics...maybe, just maybe he's onto something here? I love fossilized jelly fish .

 

[Mikecpking]

I've certainly had the opportunity to take a share of Science courses in college . Sorry my friend..I learned more from the books.

By the way...thats quite a statement to be made against a Geologist from Harvard of the caliber of Kurt Wise. You might wish to run by us or maybe even him, how the Geological record does not allow for a single universal flood or how catastrophic plate tectonics "don't add up." . You know...I'm sure theres gotta be some other reason he might accept this understanding of plate tectonics...maybe, just maybe he's onto something here? I love fossilized jelly fish .

Here in Blighty we have evidence tahn just on tectonic activity, eg the speration of the North American plate and Europe. We also have the pillow lavas (go on, google it) which is formed only at he bottom of the ocean on the surface which marks the line of a previous tectonic plate collision which created the Caaledonian mountains in Scotland, caused the great Glen fault (of which Loch Ness runs on it), so there can't be just 'one event'.

Also, your friend would have trouble in a debate if he was still alive with Hutton, who was a believer and well before evolution totally disproves catastrophic plate tectonics.
James Hutton: The Founder of Modern Geology

Sorry you are brainwashed by books and can't face exporing God's wonderful creation and how he did it over billions of years. I can appreciate it and give praise to the Creator.

 

[Mallon]

By the way...thats quite a statement to be made against a Geologist from Harvard of the caliber of Kurt Wise.

Simply earning a degree and then never publishing original research in the peer-reviewed literature doesn't make you a "high caliber" scholar.

You might wish to run by us or maybe even him, how the Geological record does not allow for a single universal flood or how catastrophic plate tectonics "don't add up."

But catastrophic plate tectonics DON'T add up. That's why they have to invoke miracles in order to get all that extra heat to go away from their calculations, lest the oceans boil away.

 

[pastorkevin73]

PS: If Adam was allegorical and not an actual Adam, how does that affect the view of original sin? This is just one of those things that will have to be modified. Thanks.

Scripture is clear that Adam was a real person. He talked about in 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14: Jud 1:14. Eve is also refered to as real person in 1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:13. Eden is mentioned as a real place in Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:9-18; 36:35; Joel 2:3.

 

[Papias]

I know that here on Christian forums, we all make a reasonable effort to read threads before we post on them, so that we don't ignore previous conversation.

Pastor wrote:

Scripture is clear that Adam was a real person. He talked about in 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14: Jud 1:14. Eve is also refered to as real person in 1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:13. Eden is mentioned as a real place in Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:9-18; 36:35; Joel 2:3.

Many Christians who support evolution know that a real, literal Adam is completely consistent with the gradual evolution of humans from apes. This was described in post #18.

Papias

 

[lucaspa]

My story goes from accepting a Theistic Evolution origin, to discovering Intelligent Design via Lee Stroebel's book "The Case for a Creator" to studying William Dembski, Stephen Meyers, Jonathan Wells, Michael Behe's books,...

I'm so sorry. I feel for you the way I feel for a friend who ended up being conned into buying a lemon from a used car salesman.

Every one of the books that led you to young earth is fatally flawed. Every one misrepresents the scientific data out there.

What's worse, ID and YEC are fatally flawed as Christian theology. ID, particularly, is atheism in disguise.

We can go into all this if you want but I would like to ask you: what was your education in "Theistic Evolution" before you started reading IDers. What had you read about evolution and the age of the earth prior to "discovering" ID?

 

[lucaspa]

.... the idea of Adam as the first transitional ape-human to get a mutation pushing him over the line to being fully human, and hence getting a specially created soul from God, before rebelling to cause original sin, again?
..........
Of course it is a slow process, but there has to be a first human, even if it is only barely more human than his parents, right?

Sorry, but that's not how evolution works. Evolution happens to populations. You start out with species A at generation 1, subject the population to natural selection, and you see species B at generation 1,000.

Where, in that transtion, exactly do you stop having species A and have species B? You don't. You don't ever have a "first" individual that is species B.

You can never take look at, say, generation 499 and say "this is species A" and then look at generation 500 and say "this is species B". And you certainly can't do that with individuals. Why? Because you are on a continuum and "Adam" is going to breed with a female that is not as "fully human" as he is! This is not a case of BAM!, the alleles are fixed in a single generation. So even if Adam has all the alleles that make him "human", his children won't because "Eve" isn't going to have all the alleles.

 

[lucaspa]

Scripture is clear that Adam was a real person. He talked about in 1 Chr 1:1; Hos 6:7; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:22, 45; 1 Tim 2:13-14: Jud 1:14. Eve is also refered to as real person in 1 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:13. Eden is mentioned as a real place in Isa 51:3; Eze 28:13; 31:9-18; 36:35; Joel 2:3.

That does not make him a real person. Hercules is talked about in a number of Greek stories and books. In those Hercules is referred to as a real person. But he wasn't, was he?

You can do the same with Romulus and Remus in Roman history. Or Prester John. Or even the tales of Paul Bunyon and Babe.

The same applies with Eden.

 

[Orogeny]

By the way...thats quite a statement to be made against a Geologist from Harvard of the caliber of Kurt Wise.

And it is quite presumptuous to assume that one geologist who, as was mentioned, lacks peer-reviewed publication, understands the functioning of plate tectonics than the thousands of geologists who have successfully published on the topic and are in disagreement with Mr. Wise.

BTW, go ahead and view this post to see just a few of the basic arguments against the 'flood geologic column' and catastrophic plate tectonics. I'd be more than happy to dig into specifics if you take issue with any of those refutations.

 

[Mallon]

HA! There it is. Pure atheist speak. Do Jesus next please

What makes lucaspa's argument "atheist speak"? Maybe instead of trying to ignore lucaspa by demonizing him, you could reply thoughtfully to his argument.

 

[pastorkevin73]

That does not make him a real person. Hercules is talked about in a number of Greek stories and books. In those Hercules is referred to as a real person. But he wasn't, was he?

You can do the same with Romulus and Remus in Roman history. Or Prester John. Or even the tales of Paul Bunyon and Babe.

The same applies with Eden.

I have given references which clearly refer to Adam and Eve as real people. If you don't want to accept and believe what scripture says that is up do you. This disbelief in the truth of God's word by most, if not all TEs is tiresome. Besides, I was address the op who was asking for help, I wasn't addressing you or anyone else.

 

[Greg1234]

What makes lucaspa's argument "atheist speak"? Maybe instead of trying to ignore lucaspa by demonizing him, you could reply thoughtfully to his argument.

You mean turn it into a theological argument? I'm not here to correct every TE and atheist debasement of text. If you want to believe that Adam was not real, that the bible is fairy tales, that Jesus was Hercules that's fine. Just present your case for Darwinism. Additionally I see no reason for you to jump to Mr "Lucaspa"'s rescue. Its atheist speak. Mingle a little.

 

[Mallon]

You mean turn it into a theological argument? I'm not here to correct every TE and atheist debasement of text. If you want to believe that Adam was not real, that the bible is fairy tales, that Jesus was Hercules that's fine. Just present your case for Darwinism. Additionally I see no reason for you to jump to Mr "Lucaspa"'s rescue. Its atheist speak. Mingle a little.

You still didn't address lucaspa's argument.

 

[Greg1234]

You still didn't address lucaspa's argument.

Yes I did. In spite of your rescue efforts, it stands. Atheist speak. Perhaps you can do Jesus for Mr "Lucaspa".

 

[Mallon]

Yes I did. In spite of your rescue efforts, it stands. Atheist speak. Perhaps you can do Jesus for Mr "Lucaspa".

Where did lucaspa deny God's existence? What makes him an atheist? You're just projecting on him. You haven't actually addressed anything he said.

 

[Assyrian]

I have given references which clearly refer to Adam and Eve as real people. If you don't want to accept and believe what scripture says that is up do you. This disbelief in the truth of God's word by most, if not all TEs is tiresome. Besides, I was address the op who was asking for help, I wasn't addressing you or anyone else.

Giving references that mention Adam is not the same as showing the references refer to real people. Were we writers speaking literally or do you just assume they were?

 

[AnswersInHovind]

Giving references that mention Adam is not the same as showing the references refer to real people. Were we writers speaking literally or do you just assume they were?

They speak of Jesus in the same sentences and in the same way. So.... is Jesus not historical then?

 

[Willtor]

Where did lucaspa deny God's existence? What makes him an atheist? You're just projecting on him. You haven't actually addressed anything he said.

He thinks that labeling Luscapa's argument, "Atheist-speak," constitutes a refutation. He doesn't understand what you're saying to him.

Greg1234, do you believe that if Hercules wasn't real that Jesus isn't, either?