Age of the earth, why is it relevant?!

Anguspure said:

I understand that the importance is linked to the definitive statement that Moses made in relation to keeping the Sabbath: For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.

If Moses was wrong about this, then what else was he wrong about?

Click to expand...

I think that is the fairy central most issue. Those who believe the Bible fear. That's some wield science as a weapon to undermine the moral authority of scripture. Science is used as an excuse. To discredit And even ridicule the Bible. So as Denigrate. It's authority meaning and value.

I suspect that Christians could accommodate MORE kinds of shall we say quantitative. Debates about specific numerical. Amounts of time, occurring during the primordial epoch of Genesis, one. If, and only if. The more science minded amongst us. Were extremely careful never to undermine the moral authority of scripture, or the general picture of a divine heavenly being intervening into and supernaturally altering the course of events on Earth.

Tetra said:

Okay, so I'm going to start off by stating my position just so we're clear. I believe the "new earth" theory is nonsense.

However, the purpose of this post isn't to debate the age of the earth, but rather, I'm trying to sort out why it matters how old the earth is?? It seems in my experience, new earthers tend to be obsessively dogmatic in holding this position. It's not sufficient that simply they hold this worldview, it's necessary everyone else does as well. Is there an underlying philosophical position I'm missing here?

Click to expand...

Late to the "party"...but to your point, in some distinct respects it matters because it impacts the credibility of one's worldview. Students raised in Christian homes with 6,000 year origin inculcation are suddenly confronted with verifiable evidence of an old earth, often causing a "crisis of Faith". The question then becomes how does one rationalize what they have been taught with what they find to be contrary to such. Gen. 1 is open to interpretation, and a reading with "sufficient delicacy" (GK) offers counter and plausible explanation. (I would hope that Roman 1:20 jettisons any notion of the "appearance of age")

We take for granted all that science has afforded us in myriad ways...such as what we are doing here at CF. Accepting science, sans naturalistic worldviews, is not apostasy, though it seems some believe that.

Erik Nelson said:

I think that is the fairy central most issue. Those who believe the Bible fear. That's some wield science as a weapon to undermine the moral authority of scripture. Science is used as an excuse. To discredit And even ridicule the Bible. So as Denigrate. It's authority meaning and value.

I suspect that Christians could accommodate MORE kinds of shall we say quantitative. Debates about specific numerical. Amounts of time, occurring during the primordial epoch of Genesis, one. If, and only if. The more science minded amongst us. Were extremely careful never to undermine the moral authority of scripture, or the general picture of a divine heavenly being intervening into and supernaturally altering the course of events on Earth.

Click to expand...

There is also an aversion to bowing before the prevailing dominant narrative when the source of that narrative is viewed as having a more generally subversive agenda.

Devin P said:

Technically, no one has proven it. That's why it's called the "theory" of evolution. A theory is - by nature - a hypothesis that has yet to be proven.

There's too many inconsistencies and omitted things to prove it as of right now. Microevolution isn't really a thing though. It's simply genes pairing and producing slightly different offspring based on dominant and non dominant traits.

Click to expand...

Wow. Regurgitated ignorance at it's finest. A Theory is the highest level something can be. A claim is made, it gets tested and retested over and over, peer reviewed, makes predictions and becomes a theory. Check out www.notjustatheory.com and take the couple of minutes needed to read the home page. It's an easy and light read with a pretty good explanation of what a theory is.

Evolution is a fact. There are mountains of evidence to look through. I understand it is easier to take the word of others that believe everything you do without question and then repeat it to others, but I like to fact check and make sure my search for truth is logical and fair.

I don't mind looking into new claims, even those that might go against my personal beliefs. Just straight up rejecting a claim because it might not align with your specific beliefs about God is wrong. We are all human and we make mistakes. It's one of the reasons we need God. I think that keeping an open mind will allow you to become more approachable to those that don't believe and conversations can then be had that allow God to move through others.

Christians believe in and follow Christ, gaining faith from -->

http://biblehub.com/romans/10-17.htm

This is what it means to be Christian, not stuff about how following some men about how to guess at details in Genesis chapter 1 -- examples: 156 hour creation vs 13.5 bn year creation, both -- differently than other Christians.

That you subscribe to one rather than the other doesn't show faith, nor compose faith, nor support faith.

http://biblehub.com/romans/10-17.htm

Here's what this real faith does --

http://biblehub.com/john/3-16.htm

No matter what theory about small details of how God created, one creationism vs another version -- that doesn't matter even 1%. Less. 0%.

It's this that matters: that you believe in Christ, and because of that belief, follow Him.

Halbhh said:

Christians believe in and follow Christ, gaining faith from -->

http://biblehub.com/romans/10-17.htm

This is what it means to be Christian, not stuff about how following some men about how to guess at details in Genesis chapter 1 -- examples: 156 hour creation vs 13.5 bn year creation, both -- differently than other Christians.

That you subscribe to one rather than the other doesn't show faith, nor compose faith, nor support faith.

http://biblehub.com/romans/10-17.htm

Here's what this real faith does --

http://biblehub.com/john/3-16.htm

No matter what theory about small details of how God created, one creationism vs another version -- that doesn't matter even 1%. Less. 0%.

It's this that matters: that you believe in Christ, and because of that belief, follow Him.

Click to expand...

Yes, a number of scriptural issues are peripheral to the core message of the Bible. However, as it relates to the influence on culture in general there is much validity to these tangential details of a Christian worldview and as it relates to reality in both politics and science.

Inkfingers said:

So do you take literally the idea that Jesus was a lamb (ie: small, woolly, tending to bleat and gambol)?

It is possible to read Genesis as poetry with calling God a liar.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what it is - allegorical poetry meant to convey a deeper truth. When it says "in the beginning god created..." In my mind, this is an allegory to describe energy and matter as primordial forces which are responsible for our reality. People say god is omnipotent, omnipresent, and has always existed. Well energy and matter are omnipotent, omnipresent, and has always existed. Everything is energy and energy is everything...

As a Christian, I accept the concept of evolution. I do not hold that it is a theory because it can be proven based on facts so...

LWH said:

As a Christian, I accept the concept of evolution. I do not hold that it is a theory because it can be proven based on facts so...

Click to expand...

I'm confused. You accept the Theory of Evolution but you don't think it is a theory?

Danielwright2311 said:

I do not need any evidence to preach truth.

Why do you need evidence?

You want evidence? then pray with faith like I did.

Click to expand...

Without evidence, you have no truth....only belief. And it is ok to preach what you believe.... But our message should be to come and see the Man......not to stay where you are and just believe what I said about him.

"Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world."

Tetra said:

Depends on what you mean by evolution exactly, but generally speaking, yes.

Click to expand...

I mean what most do.

Tetra said:

You can believe all of that and believe the earth is old.

Click to expand...

So, you can believe God made man from the dust of the earth (in his entirety) and still believe he evolved into what he is? And you can believe that without adding possibilities from ours or the minds of others? IOW you get evolution straight from the bible, nothing added or taken away to draw the conclusion?

If so, what in the Bible suggests evolution? I say "suggests" because I see nothing that actually flat out agrees with it.

My comments are in keeping with the OP/subject, just my way of getting to proper answers for you so please bear with me.

Kenny'sID said:

If so, what in the Bible suggests evolution? I say "suggests" because I see nothing that actually flat out agrees with it. My comments are in keeping with the OP/subject, just my way of getting to proper answers for you so please bear with me.

Click to expand...

If I may suggest, Genesis does say explicitly "Let the land..." or "Let the water produce/bring forth...". Obviously it can easily be asserted as a mediate command that involves a process.

Jamsie said:

If I may suggest, Genesis does say explicitly "Let the land..." or "Let the water produce/bring forth...". Obviously it can easily be asserted as a mediate command that involves a process.

Click to expand...

Or an orderly creation.

Land, before land animals.
Ocean, before ocean animals.

In the beginning God created...
The earth was without form and void... formless and empty.
On the seventh day God ceased from all the work of creating.

Saint Steven said:

Or an orderly creation.
Land, before land animals.
Ocean, before ocean animals.
In the beginning God created...
The earth was without form and void... formless and empty.
On the seventh day God ceased from all the work of creating.

Click to expand...

The point is a certain humility may be warranted in holding to a strict and narrow view. The command/fiat is to the land, is it not? God does not command "Let there be living creatures" … and since God's spoken commands were the sole operative of agent of creation could it not have been an immediate command? This is a bit off topic and has been addressed in the "Creation & Theistic Evolution" forum.

Jamsie said:

If I may suggest, Genesis does say explicitly "Let the land..." or "Let the water produce/bring forth...". Obviously it can easily be asserted as a mediate command that involves a process.

Click to expand...

But it seems most, if not all translations see that as similar to this one:

New International Version
And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky."

But beyond that, how is it not clear that Adam was created then and there, in his entirety out of the dust of the earth? How do we see him evolving from those waters, in line with evolution? Seems to me, since I anyway, cannot see how the bible is not clear on Adams creation, that verifies the general translation, and maybe one reason the general translation of your scripture is what it is.

I think the sense in which it "matters" as a theological belief that must be spread is that, if true, it is an absolute defeater for evolution. I think that is why it is proactively presented rather than just defended like many other theological beliefs.

Kenny'sID said:

But it seems most, if not all translations see that as similar to this one:

New International Version
And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky."

But beyond that, how is it not clear that Adam was created then and there, in his entirety out of the dust of the earth? How do we see him evolving from those waters, in line with evolution? Seems to me, since I anyway, cannot see how the bible is not clear on Adams creation, that verifies the general translation, and maybe one reason the general translation of your scripture is what it is.

Click to expand...

Again, address what scripture clearly states "And God said, Let the land produce..." that is mediate creation. The commands whether water or land has God speaking to the created matter to produce, seems quite clear. Genesis 2:7 "made from dust" … and the significant part "breathed...the breath of life..."

Again, one may disagree with the various interpretations of Genesis/Creation but as you stated no one should claim to have all of the answers.

Saint Steven said:

Right. People often ask, "How do you fit Evolution into the Bible?" Fact is, you can't.

Click to expand...

You call it fitting "evolution" into the Bible, I call it addressing God ordained processes as stated in the Bible. If one calls it evolution so what...Evolution in the sense that it is the sole source of life is not something I or any Christian would affirm. Further, why is the concept that God created processes, which to some degree we see today, be such a burdensome irritant to so many? That life is dynamic and not static in some sense hardly diminishes the Almighty God.

Saint Steven said:

I have peace with God. A personal relationship with Him. There is no human reasoning for this.

Click to expand...

Did you accept Christ as your Savior and Lord? If so there was absolutely no reason for this? Perhaps, some would suggest "well, that is what my parents taught me and so it just was" but most have some human" motivation whether of personal crisis, an emptimness, a still small voice, yes and intellectual assent and what we are talking about is an initial prompt.