Young Earth Creation as opposed to Old Earth Creation (aka evolution lite)

[Papias]

Smidlee wrote:

Originally Posted by Papias

Metal Minister wrote:

Simply and demonstrably false. MM, are you a minister and still unaware that there where plenty of early Christians, even prominent ones, who did not agree with a literal interpretation of Genesis?

Papias is right in Jesus days (on earth) they were called Sadducees.

Um, Smidlee, the Sadducees were a sect of Jews. The Sadducees were not early Christians. You know that, right?

******************************************

Metal Minister wrote:

Papias wrote:

Simply and demonstrably false. MM, are you a minister and still unaware that there where plenty of early Christians, even prominent ones, who did not agree with a literal interpretation of Genesis?

**********
While there may have been some, the vast majority beloved it literally, otherwise how would you be able to take any part literally? Especially the part involving salvation

Which part of Genesis "involving salvation" do you mean?
Do you have any support for the idea that the "vast majority" saw it literally, or is that just your opinion? Separating literal from non-literal is done all the time - you do it yourself, when you decide that "take my flesh and eat it" is non-literal, but the resurrection is literal.

Ok, major disagreement here. Cause of disease is not only discussed, but the proper treatment of is discussed throughout Leviticus. It's mentioned for people to be isolated when a disease or leprosy was found, and how to determine if it was leprosy or not.

OK, please show me the verses that say that diseases are caused by germs.

The old testament is full of examples. There is only one example (supposedly) of the bible claiming the earth is flat, and multiple instances of it stating the earth is round.

I know of no cases in most of our different Bibles that describe the earth as a sphere. On the other hand, the Bibles tell us that the earth is flat like a piece of clay stamped under a seal (Job 38:13-14), that it has edges as only a flat plane would (Job 38:13-14,.Psa 19:4), that it is a circular disk (Isa 40:22), and that its entire surface can be seen from a high tree (Dan 4:10-11) or mountain (Matt 4:8), which is impossible for a sphere, but possible for a flat disk. Taken literally, as the YECs insist we do, any one of these passages shows a flat earth. Taken together, they are even more clear.

Also, as others have pointed out, your list of "evidences" is filled with known hoaxes, misleading data, and overall pseudoscience. When we, as Christians, present that kind of rubbish, and then turn around and talk about salvation, the unsaved naturally think that our support for Christianity is as poor as our support for creationism, and quite justifiable write us off. Have you read St. Augustine's quote about that? It applies quite well to YEC today, and further, St. Augustine himself rejected a literal interpretation of Genesis. Metal Minister, you are young and have a good bit of researching to do to understand the pros and cons of these, and to gain the critical thinking that will be important in helping draw people to Christ.

Just to give short responses:

Receding Moon (recession rate is consistent with an old earth - have you read the thread on this here http://www.christianforums.com/t7489648-6/ ?)
Oil Pressure (these are in impermeable rocks, so pressure not a surprise, plus, only an old earth shows why the pressure is there to start with)
Shrinking Sun (disproven)
Oldest living thing only roughly 4500 years old (simply false, plenty of living things are over 4,500 years old, such as the 10,00 year old Huon pine colony, quaking aspen at 80,000, King Clone at 11,700, the Jurupa Oaks, and many, many more.)
Helium In Our Atmosphere (simply false - Helium escapes to space)
Short Period Comets (simply false, they are replenished, with a well known source)
Earth's Magnetic Field (simply false, it's well known to oscillate)
DNA Found In Supposedly 165 myo Dino Bones (not a problem)
C14 levels In Earth's Atmosphere (are replenished by nitrogen decay)
Salt Content of The Dead Sea (is well known to be systematically saturated)
Eve's Mitochondrial DNA (dates to 200,000 years ago - disproves a 6,000 year old earth)
Rapid Mountain Uplift (always takes longer than 6,000 years)

More info here: An Index to Creationist Claims

I think many of these are so bad they have been abandoned even by other creationists. With ministers and other Christians still using arguments like these, is it any surprise that the younger generations are fleeing the churches?

Papias

 

[Smidlee]

Smidlee wrote:

Um, Smidlee, the Sadducees were a sect of Jews. The Sadducees were not early Christians. You know that, right?

Exactly! The Sadducees were before Christians. Their teachings are still around today. (Sadducees claimed to be "followers of God" just like Christians.)

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Again, I did not want a scientific debate but I instead wanted a theological discussion

I edited the quote just to highlight the part that I'm discussing right now; the post you were responding to was pretty combative, and I want to be clear that I'm not arguing in support of that.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that you're underestimating the importance of science to this debate. It's not really possible to have a solely theological discussion about the age of the Earth/evolution. While I would (and do) argue that allegorical interpretations of Genesis are older than Christianity, most of those arguments were based on outside evidence as well. A totally theological argument ignores the reasons why many of us don't support Young Earth Creationism.

For me, I actually came through a sort of bumpy path to Theistic Evolution, but my reasons for that were based on my viewing and slowly learning about the different pieces of evidence. Any theological arguments that I have are to explain how I believe what I do, but not why. I can't argue the "why" from just that angle.

Exactly! The Sadducees were before Christians. Their teachings are still around today. (Sadducees claimed to be "followers of God" just like Christians.)

I'm not entirely clear on everything that the Sadducees believed, but I don't think that they generally interpreted Genesis allegorically. Some may have, but it doesn't seem to have been a dominant belief among them, and the fact that it originated with someone who was not a Sadducee makes it seem unlikely. The earliest allegorical interpretation of Genesis that I know of came from Philo the Jew, who was a Hellenized Jew born in Alexandria.

The Sadducees believed only in the first few books of the Bible (I think all of the Pentateuch, including Genesis, but nothing after that) and did not believe in an eternal soul, reward or punishment after death, or the resurrection of the body.

 

[cleminson]

In my opinion the Bible supports old Earth theology much more than young Earth theology. I believe that God created Adam some time during the third yom and mankind during the sixth yom. I also believe that Adam arrived on this Earth some time between 7000 and 4000 years ago after he Fell. He Fell onto an Earth already populated by mankind. I also believe that we Gentiles apply the Genesis Scriptures to our selves, when in reality, they tell the story of a unique people, the Adamic linage or the sons of God.

 

[cleminson]

In my opinion the Bible supports old Earth theology much more than young Earth theology. I believe that God created Adam some time during the third yom and mankind during the sixth yom. I also believe that Adam arrived on this Earth some time between 7000 and 4000 years ago after he Fell. He Fell onto an Earth already populated by mankind. I also believe that we Gentiles apply the Genesis Scriptures to our selves, when in reality, they tell the story of a unique people, the Adamic linage or the sons of God.

 

[ChristianT]

That's an interesting interpretation, cleminson! I think I can understand your reasoning. And I think that's the basic understanding of OEC.

 

[Metal Minister]

nwcreation(dot)net/videos/AstoundingEvidenceforYoungEarth(dot)html

This should help a bit in proving my point. I apologize about not being here more frequently but I've just taken on another college course and my time is extremely limited right now.

 

[miamited]

hi MM,

Thank you so very much for that link. God is good and God is great! I've been a YEC pretty much since I was born again, but I still enjoy boning up on the evidences of the awesome power and glory and purpose of my Father.

Thank you and God bless you. See you on the other side.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Papias]

MM, posting a video, from a discredited source without even showing us that you yourself understand the issues involved is hardly a compelling argument.

If you think any of your points actually carry any weight, please pick one and make a topic thread of it in the main origins forum. Otherwise, I suggest that you spend some time seriously thinking about our responsibility as Christians to understand a topic fully before talking about it, lest we bear false witness out of our own ignorance.

For college classes, have you considered taking college classes on biology and geology, so as to understand those topics?

***************************
Smidlee wrote (post #12)

Papias wrote:

there were plenty of early Christians... who did not agree with ....

Papias is right in Jesus days (on earth) they were called Sadducees.

Smidlee, in post #12 you stated that the early Christians I was referring to were Sadduccees. So now (since you said "exactly" when I pointed out that the Sadduccees were Jews, not Christians), do you agree that you were incorrect in post #12?


Papias

 

[Metal Minister]

MM, posting a video, from a discredited source without even showing us that you yourself understand the issues involved is hardly a compelling argument.

If you think any of your points actually carry any weight, please pick one and make a topic thread of it in the main origins forum. Otherwise, I suggest that you spend some time seriously thinking about our responsibility as Christians to understand a topic fully before talking about it, lest we bear false witness out of our own ignorance.
**********
I've seen you do this several times now. Dismissing point without any actual fact. I started this thread to show that the bible, in its Hebrew form, state quite definitively that the daft was created in 6 literal days, and is only about 6000 years old.
So far I've had people assert this is not true, yet have failed to prove this with anything other than opinion. Did you even bother to listen to the facts presented or did you prefer to remain closed minded? Think about it this way. If the entirety of creation is not literal, then Jesus' death on the cross has no meaning. It means death had to exist before the fall of man. If this is the case, then when Jesus mentions and backs up the 6 day creation, then he would be lying. My problem with OEC's I'd they place limitations of time and intelligence on God. God is not affected by time, He created it. Evolution is a failed idea, with no basis. If God did not create the dinosaurs, where did they come from? The precious fossil record simply shows them beings here fully formed, minus the million of intermediary fossils that need to exist for them to evolve, yet God said he produced the all and that they would bring forth after their kind. If you truly study what the bible teaches it is as much a scientific book and a spiritual book.
**********
For college classes, have you considered taking college classes on biology and geology, so as to understand those topics?

**********
It's statements like these that upset believers and jon-believers alike. It is arrogant and self-righteous ( whether meaning to be or not.) This more than a belief in a young earth is bearing false witness. There is no definitive proof of an old earth, or evolution would be called a fact. Until the bible is proven wrong, and evolution is proven as a 100% fact, I will continue to follow God's word as it is written. To follow an athiestic scientist over God's word, is literally the blind leading the blind. As it happens to stand I'm taking courses on biblical history, and attempting to get my bachelors in science in the bible.
***************************

If this seems harsh, I apologize, but I do not take kindly to being called ignorant or stupid by someone who does not know me and is so inflexible and hard hearted as to brush off an opposing viewpoint without so much as having a civil discussion. My end goal is to win souls to the Lord. How can I do that if when someone asks me if the bible is true, I have to tell them no, because we can't take it literally, and that God was so hateful as to let hundreds of millions of years of death bring us into the world, which contradicts his own Word.
One day I truly pray that God will soften your heart and allow Him to show you what I mean. Yours in Christ, MM.

 

[Metal Minister]

1 Thessalonians 5:21 21 But a examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good

 

[ChristianT]

MM, posting a video, from a discredited source without even showing us that you yourself understand the issues involved is hardly a compelling argument.

If you think any of your points actually carry any weight, please pick one and make a topic thread of it in the main origins forum. Otherwise, I suggest that you spend some time seriously thinking about our responsibility as Christians to understand a topic fully before talking about it, lest we bear false witness out of our own ignorance.
**********
I've seen you do this several times now. Dismissing point without any actual fact. I started this thread to show that the bible, in its Hebrew form, state quite definitively that the daft was created in 6 literal days, and is only about 6000 years old.
So far I've had people assert this is not true, yet have failed to prove this with anything other than opinion. Did you even bother to listen to the facts presented or did you prefer to remain closed minded? Think about it this way. If the entirety of creation is not literal, then Jesus' death on the cross has no meaning. It means death had to exist before the fall of man. If this is the case, then when Jesus mentions and backs up the 6 day creation, then he would be lying. My problem with OEC's I'd they place limitations of time and intelligence on God. God is not affected by time, He created it. Evolution is a failed idea, with no basis. If God did not create the dinosaurs, where did they come from? The precious fossil record simply shows them beings here fully formed, minus the million of intermediary fossils that need to exist for them to evolve, yet God said he produced the all and that they would bring forth after their kind. If you truly study what the bible teaches it is as much a scientific book and a spiritual book.
**********
For college classes, have you considered taking college classes on biology and geology, so as to understand those topics?

**********
It's statements like these that upset believers and jon-believers alike. It is arrogant and self-righteous ( whether meaning to be or not.) This more than a belief in a young earth is bearing false witness. There is no definitive proof of an old earth, or evolution would be called a fact. Until the bible is proven wrong, and evolution is proven as a 100% fact, I will continue to follow God's word as it is written. To follow an athiestic scientist over God's word, is literally the blind leading the blind. As it happens to stand I'm taking courses on biblical history, and attempting to get my bachelors in science in the bible.
***************************

If this seems harsh, I apologize, but I do not take kindly to being called ignorant or stupid by someone who does not know me and is so inflexible and hard hearted as to brush off an opposing viewpoint without so much as having a civil discussion. My end goal is to win souls to the Lord. How can I do that if when someone asks me if the bible is true, I have to tell them no, because we can't take it literally, and that God was so hateful as to let hundreds of millions of years of death bring us into the world, which contradicts his own Word.
One day I truly pray that God will soften your heart and allow Him to show you what I mean. Yours in Christ, MM.

Ignorant =/= stupid. Though you can interpret it that way. If I am ignorant of something, I don't know it as someone who has studied it does.

Also, no scientific fact can be proven to be 100% fact, as we know it in the laity of science. In science, if there is proof for a hypothesis, the conclusion is that it is a fact if no substantial counter-evidence is shown or if the evidence cannot support another hypothesis better. In any case, the idea that biological death is cruel is an archaic belief. While it may be hard for us to accept death when it's within our family or community, what about when it happens to your dinner? Why is death of chicken for your meals not cruel, especially if it was via a hunter? Or what makes the death of vegetables / fruits - biologically - so tolerable for us? Why pick and choose such things? In any case, not all scientists who ascribe to evolution are atheists : fact. If the Bible is a great standard for scientific ideas, please explain this: Genesis 30:37-40. Biology shows that physical properties like fur color comes from genetics, not the color of surrounding objects. I understand it to be recessives showing out the second generation, but that's only because the figurative understanding of it seems more viable.

 

[Metal Minister]

Why would Moses enumerate creation through six "days" if he meant "ages" rather than a twenty-four hour period? Moses' purpose in Genesis one was to show that God created the universe in distinct stages, that there was an orderly plan to God's method of creation and God was working toward an ultimate goal, the climax of creation--mankind.

This is where the true problem for evolution arises. Evolution is in no way orderly. It is messy, sloppy, and requires massive amounts of death to complete.

 

[ChristianT]

Why would Moses enumerate creation through six "days" if he meant "ages" rather than a twenty-four hour period? Moses' purpose in Genesis one was to show that God created the universe in distinct stages, that there was an orderly plan to God's method of creation and God was working toward an ultimate goal, the climax of creation--mankind.

This is where the true problem for evolution arises. Evolution is in no way orderly. It is messy, sloppy, and requires massive amounts of death to complete.

Did Moses create Genesis, or did he write as he was inspired by God? If it is the latter, God would have most likely "dummed down" what "actually happened" in a way they'd understand it and still be applicable.

 

[Metal Minister]

First, in Genesis, it states that everything ate plants, and God does not consider plants "alive" as we do today. He makes this distinction in the fact that He said that He made plants first, and the says He created all the living things on another day. As for Genesis 30: 37-40, read the woke of the chapter. God told Jacob he would be blessed in all he did, so when Laban tried to cheat Jacob, God's blessing held, and allowed Jacob's plan to work.

 

[Metal Minister]

Did Moses create Genesis, or did he write as he was inspired by God? If it is the latter, God would have most likely "dummed down" what "actually happened" in a way they'd understand it and still be applicable.

Moses had the original stone tablets that God had created with what happened, and something else most people miss is that Moses was the one who put the books of the old testament together, and wrote only a small part of it. There were 9 other I eye witness authors to the old testament.

 

[ChristianT]

Moses had the original stone tablets that God had created with what happened, and something else most people miss is that Moses was the one who put the books of the old testament together, and wrote only a small part of it. There were 9 other I eye witness authors to the old testament.

Kay. so Moses created the pentateuch. But what's this about "original stone tablets," where's that in Scripture? I only remember the commandments on stone tablets. And about the 9 witnesses, where's that in Scripture? (Or could you actually provide resources please)


***

Oh, yeah I already knew Moses didn't write the whole OT. That's already established, but we were discussing Genesis, not Isaiah or Malachi

 

[Metal Minister]

Excuse me, there were 9 other authors to Genesis

 

[Metal Minister]

Kay. so Moses created the pentateuch. But what's this about "original stone tablets," where's that in Scripture? I only remember the commandments on stone tablets. And about the 9 witnesses, where's that in Scripture? (Or could you actually provide resources please)

www(dot)truthingenesis(dot)com/book-of-genesis-authors(dot)html

 

[ChristianT]

thanks