Young earth creationism & 40000 year old frozen wolf

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Genesis is a complex bit of scripture which has hidden meanings etc. I am sure that its not to be taken absolutely literal. This is my own gut feeling.
Given that Hebrew Scholars attest to the fact that the verbiage in Genesis is absolutely intended to indicate six solar days and God Himself said He created the heavens and earth in six days, I'll issue to you the same challenge. Provide passages from the Bible to support your claims. I don't mean verses out of context, I mean passages.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The papers are most likely rejected because they don't provide adequate scientific evidence to support their claims. It would be more honest to make it clear that the proposals are faith claims rather than scientific hypotheses. Unfortunately YECs have opened the door to flat earthers claiming scientific validity for their ideas which also come from a particular reading of the Bible that treats it as a scientific treatise. If the Bible were meant to be treated that way, it's rather lacking in detail. If science was limited to the Bible, we'd have to live like the Amish (whose sincerity in eschewing modern inventions because of their faith I admire).


“The papers are most likely rejected because they don't provide adequate scientific evidence to support their claims.”



That is what the evolutionists will tell us. But rather than rely on their word, why don’t you take the time to read the YEC material for yourself and investigate the sources they provide for their claims?


“It would be more honest to make it clear that the proposals are faith claims rather than scientific hypotheses.”


When it gets right down to it, evolution is just as much of a faith claim as the claim that the earth was created in six days. We have never witnessed molecules becoming a man, at least in the manner evolution teaches, nor have we witnessed the earth being created in six days. Other than God Himself, the closest witness we would have to testify of that account would be Adam.

But no one has ever observed evolution in action. There is no written account of cells turning into plants, animals and man nor has anyone observed life coming about by random processes and there has been no observable account of the geologic features we see today forming over millions of years.

But the YEC’s have a written account of our origins. How that account was acquired by Moses to whom the authorship of that account is credited, whether by divine revelation or whether it was an account passed down from Adam to Moses, we do not know. But who is to say that God did not explain to someone at some point our origins and how He created everything that there is?



“Unfortunately YECs have opened the door to flat earthers claiming scientific validity for their ideas which also come from a particular reading of the Bible that treats it as a scientific treatise.”



YECs typically do not support the flat-earth doctrine and you would be surprised to know that the Bible teaches that the earth is round. (Is. 40:22) It is not the observable and testable science that is disputed but it is how we originated that is disputed. Both YECs and evolutionists observe the same things and the same data, and both sides will tell you why the evidence supports their side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWCrazy
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Given that Hebrew Scholars attest to the fact that the verbiage in Genesis is absolutely intended to indicate six solar days and God Himself said He created the heavens and earth in six days, I'll issue to you the same challenge. Provide passages from the Bible to support your claims. I don't mean verses out of context, I mean passages.

One day to God can be a thousand years. Even a million years. Even a billion years!
 
Upvote 0

mcarans

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 10, 2018
539
226
47
Wellington
✟136,444.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
“The papers are most likely rejected because they don't provide adequate scientific evidence to support their claims.”
That is what the evolutionists will tell us. But rather than rely on their word, why don’t you take the time to read the YEC material for yourself and investigate the sources they provide for their claims?


“It would be more honest to make it clear that the proposals are faith claims rather than scientific hypotheses.”


When it gets right down to it, evolution is just as much of a faith claim as the claim that the earth was created in six days. We have never witnessed molecules becoming a man, at least in the manner evolution teaches, nor have we witnessed the earth being created in six days. Other than God Himself, the closest witness we would have to testify of that account would be Adam.

But no one has ever observed evolution in action. There is no written account of cells turning into plants, animals and man nor has anyone observed life coming about by random processes and there has been no observable account of the geologic features we see today forming over millions of years.

But the YEC’s have a written account of our origins. How that account was acquired by Moses to whom the authorship of that account is credited, whether by divine revelation or whether it was an account passed down from Adam to Moses, we do not know. But who is to say that God did not explain to someone at some point our origins and how He created everything that there is?



“Unfortunately YECs have opened the door to flat earthers claiming scientific validity for their ideas which also come from a particular reading of the Bible that treats it as a scientific treatise.”



YECs typically do not support the flat-earth doctrine and you would be surprised to know that the Bible teaches that the earth is round. (Is. 40:22) It is not the observable and testable science that is disputed but it is how we originated that is disputed. Both YECs and evolutionists observe the same things and the same data, and both sides will tell you why the evidence supports their side.
Flat earth websites list hundreds of supporting verses and have the same sort of scientific evidence as YECs. What makes you sure they are wrong? I'll bet it's the photos from space rather than Scripture.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
One day to God can be a thousand years. Even a million years. Even a billion years!
So you have a thousand year day followed by a thousand year night in which everything died. Right.
A day is described as an evening and morning from the earth's perspective; one rotation of the planet. It is intended to interpreted as it was written.
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

Not millions of years. The Bible does not conform to evolution. With two conflicting versions, only one can be true. We accept the word of God, you reject it.
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
So you have a thousand year day followed by a thousand year night in which everything died. Right.
A day is described as an evening and morning from the earth's perspective; one rotation of the planet. It is intended to interpreted as it was written.
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

Not millions of years. The Bible does not conform to evolution. With two conflicting versions, only one can be true. We accept the word of God, you reject it.

No, you 'interpret' it incorrectly!
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No, you 'interpret' it incorrectly!
You won't find any Hebrew scholars who would agree with you, and you know as well as I do there is nothing in the Bible to support an old earth. I was taught the earth was old growing up. I've read the Bible from beginning to end and NOTHING hints at an old earth. You can't produce anything to validate your claim, so your opinion is of no value.
 
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,947
11,699
Neath
✟1,002,593.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
You won't find any Hebrew scholars who would agree with you, and you know as well as I do there is nothing in the Bible to support an old earth. I was taught the earth was old growing up. I've read the Bible from beginning to end and NOTHING hints at an old earth. You can't produce anything to validate your claim, so your opinion is of no value.

Your interpretation of scripture is 'your' own. There is more to the bible than just black and white.

Also, God gave us science. Science has proven the earth is extremely old.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: steve78
Upvote 0

steve78

Newbie
Jan 18, 2011
500
181
✟18,341.00
Faith
Salvation Army
Marital Status
Married
"The severed head of a wolf that died about 40,000 years ago has been found in Siberia, and because of the freezing conditions, the remains are so well preserved that the fur, teeth, brain and facial tissue are largely intact.

Pavel Yefimov, a local resident, discovered the head last summer on the banks of the Tirekhtyakh river close to the Arctic Circle in the region of Yakutia, according to the Siberian Times.

3500.jpg


The head was handed to the Science Academy of Yakutia. Researchers there sent samples and measurement data abroad and with help from colleagues in Japan and Sweden determined its age as approximately 40,000 years, the news outlet said.

Footage provided to Reuters TV by the academy shows the head of an animal, visibly bigger than that of a modern wolf, covered with fur and with teeth visible. Its eyes are missing."

Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?

Frozen wolf's head found in Siberia is 40,000 years old

Young earth creationism is wrong mate, its not even based on credible science.

The Wolfs head is a great find though. It could be slightly older than 40,000 years.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Flat earth websites list hundreds of supporting verses and have the same sort of scientific evidence as YECs. What makes you sure they are wrong? I'll bet it's the photos from space rather than Scripture.


Have you not read where it is written that the Lord “sitteth upon the circle of the earth”? (Is. 40:22) or where it is written that He “hangeth the earth upon nothing”? (Job 26:7) And since the space photos show an earth with a circular shape as described by the prophet Isaiah and an earth suspended over nothing as described in the book of Job, do not the photos themselves vindicate the scriptures which had spoken of these things before they were seen by man?

As far as the flat earth society is concerned, I have not found in scripture the hundreds of verses you claim they use to support their doctrine aside from a few in which common expressions are used to describe the four directions of the earth (north, south, east, and west) and which are still commonly used today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWCrazy
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

steve78

Newbie
Jan 18, 2011
500
181
✟18,341.00
Faith
Salvation Army
Marital Status
Married
You won't find any Hebrew scholars who would agree with you, and you know as well as I do there is nothing in the Bible to support an old earth. I was taught the earth was old growing up. I've read the Bible from beginning to end and NOTHING hints at an old earth. You can't produce anything to validate your claim, so your opinion is of no value.

There is nothing in the bible to support a young earth either.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Martinovich

Friend
Supporter
Oct 7, 2011
1,982
591
Southwest USA
Visit site
✟487,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Carbon dating is a dating technique predicated upon three things:

  • The rate at which the unstable radioactive C-14 isotope decays into the stable non-radioactive N-14 isotope,
  • The ratio of C-12 to C-14 found in a given specimen,
  • And the ratio C-12 to C-14 found in the atmosphere at the time of the specimen's death.
Carbon dating is controversial for a couple of reasons. First of all, it's predicated upon a set of questionable assumptions. We have to assume, for example, that the rate of decay (that is, a 5,730 year half-life) has remained constant throughout the unobservable past. However, there is strong evidence which suggests that radioactive decay may have been greatly accelerated in the unobservable past.1 We must also assume that the ratio of C-12 to C-14 in the atmosphere has remained constant throughout the unobservable past (so we can know what the ratio was at the time of the specimen's death). And yet we know that "radiocarbon is forming 28-37% faster than it is decaying,"2 which means it hasn't yet reached equilibrium, which means the ratio is higher today than it was in the unobservable past. We also know that the ratio decreased during the industrial revolution due to the dramatic increase of CO2 produced by factories. This man-made fluctuation wasn't a natural occurrence, but it demonstrates the fact that fluctuation is possible and that a period of natural upheaval upon the earth could greatly affect the ratio. Volcanoes spew out CO2 which could just as effectively decrease the ratio. Specimens which lived and died during a period of intense volcanism would appear older than they really are if they were dated using this technique. The ratio can further be affected by C-14 production rates in the atmosphere, which in turn is affected by the amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere. The amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere is itself affected by things like the earth's magnetic field which deflects cosmic rays. Precise measurements taken over the last 140 years have shown a steady decay in the strength of the earth's magnetic field. This means there's been a steady increase in radiocarbon production (which would increase the ratio).

And finally, this dating scheme is controversial because the dates derived are often wildly inconsistent. For example, "One part of Dima [a famous baby mammoth discovered in 1977] was 40,000 RCY [Radiocarbon Years], another was 26,000 RCY, and 'wood found immediately around the carcass' was 9,000-10,000 RCY." (Walt Brown, In the Beginning, 2001, p. 176)
Carbon Dating


Absolutely no one knows what conditions were like back to the time of creation---it didn't even rain until the flood. And then afterwards, they still don't know what the conditions were. In a nutshell---carbon dating is only accurate to the known conditions which still means only about 6-10,000 years.

The conventional methods by which these alleged dates are assigned to these types of discoveries are untrustworthy because they are based on three basic assumptions that cannot be confirmed. The assumptions upon which they are based are:



1. Constant rate of decay.

2. No presence of daughter product alongside parent product.

(What is meant by parent and daughter product is one element produced from another. For example, C-14 from C-12 or Lead from Uranium. C-12 is a parent product and C-14 is the daughter product of C-12. Uranium is a parent product and lead is the daughter product of Uranium)

3. Closed system which is based on the assumption that the sample being dated was not contaminated by any external elements.



With organic material, which would include this wolf’s head, the rate of decay can slow or accelerate under certain conditions which makes C-14 dating under which this wolf’s head would have undergone unreliable.

Because the wolf’s head that was discovered was found under conditions that have kept it fairly intact and preserved, the rate of decay would have been very slow in comparison to other conditions which would have accelerated the rate of decay.

All that C-14 dating can really tell anyone for is the ratio of C-12 to C-14, but it can never really tell you how old something is because, again, the assumptions upon which the entire dating premise is founded cannot be confirmed. The same goes for radiometric dating as well.

For more information on why young earth creationists do not trust radiometric or carbon dating results, and not just from a theological perspective but even from a scientific perspective, visit the following:



The Institute For Creation Research (ICR) at https://www.icr.org
or Creation Ministries International at https://creation.com


Answers In Genesis and Creationwiki may also have information on why conventional dating methods cannot be trusted as well:


Answers In Genesis can be found at https://answersingenesis.org
and Creationwiki can be found at https://creationwiki.org



Creationism.org has list of other young earth creationist ministries that might also have some helpful information as well.

You guys have just scratched the surface of the problems with dating methods. Did good though. People put so much faith in the tabloid science media. It's pathetic.
 
Upvote 0

steve78

Newbie
Jan 18, 2011
500
181
✟18,341.00
Faith
Salvation Army
Marital Status
Married
You guys have just scratched the surface of the problems with dating methods. Did good though. People put so much faith in the tabloid science media. It's pathetic.

Problems with carbon dating aside there is plenty of other science that proves the earth is old.

Age of the Earth from seasonal rings and layers.

Age of the Earth and solar system from radiometric dating

Age of galaxies from the travel time of light

Age of the universe from expansion

These are just a sample. Many different and complementary scientific measurements have established with near certainty that the universe and the Earth are billions of years old. Young earth creationism is just pure nonsense.




 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
You guys have just scratched the surface of the problems with dating methods. Did good though. People put so much faith in the tabloid science media. It's pathetic.


1Ti_6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Science by definition has to be a repeatable thing in order for it to be scientifically proven. It's not possible to repeat a creation that is millions of years old and no scientist has yet to make anything living from nothing.
The bible is to be taken literally unless it specifically reads as a parable or symbolic in nature. Genesis is not symbolic and is literal. That God would introduce a 7thy day Sabbath at creation to memorialize His creation in 6 days and have it be for something that took millions of years makes no sense whatsoever. A word study on the word yom--for day--itself declares this is a 6 literal day creation.

"The Hebrew word for day is yom and this word appears in Scriptures over 1400 times. And without exception this word, when written in the singular sense, means day. And that's it. Never anything else. Eons are indicated with the plural form: days, as in the days of such and such. The most popular counter argument is that the meaning of our word is fiercely restricted to 'day' for about a thousand times in the sequential Scriptures, but in the secluded chapter of Genesis 1 means something completely different! But honestly, if in Genesis 1 our word should have meant 'long time' it would have said 'long time'. There are words available in Hebrew that mean just that. None of which occur in Genesis 1.

The word as used in Genesis 1 means day and day alone. There's no way around it, and every serious theory to make (systematic, not theological) sense out of Genesis 1 should first and foremost address the yom-problem.
A yom therefore is a phase of a continuum (whether space-time, complexity or something else) that consists of two periods: a 'dark' part and a 'light' part. During the dark part of a regular day people sleep and are disconnected. During the light part they communicate and work together. Any other manifestation of yom should display the same kind of darkness (elements not connected) and lightness (elements connected).
The yom problem in addressing Genesis 1
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

steve78

Newbie
Jan 18, 2011
500
181
✟18,341.00
Faith
Salvation Army
Marital Status
Married
So you have a thousand year day followed by a thousand year night in which everything died. Right.
A day is described as an evening and morning from the earth's perspective; one rotation of the planet. It is intended to interpreted as it was written.
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

Not millions of years. The Bible does not conform to evolution. With two conflicting versions, only one can be true. We accept the word of God, you reject it.

Nope, you just interpret scripture wrong. The earth is old and science proves it.

Scripture actually agrees with the science. Scripture states the earth was created in 7 days, it does not say how long these days are. Young earthers just make assumptions that they are 24 hours in length they also make assumptions based on Adams family lineage in the bible which is incomplete.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Martinovich

Friend
Supporter
Oct 7, 2011
1,982
591
Southwest USA
Visit site
✟487,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Problems with carbon dating aside there is plenty of other science that proves the earth is old.

Age of the Earth from seasonal rings and layers.

Age of the Earth and solar system from radiometric dating

Age of galaxies from the travel time of light

Age of the universe from expansion


These are just a sample. Many different and complementary scientific measurements have established with near certainty that the universe and the Earth are billions of years old. Young earth creationism is just pure nonsense.




Tabloid media science there too. Afraid you don't know anything about any of those things in the depth you need to, to be able to put your faith in them.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
5 and~he~will~CALL.OUT(V) (וַיִּקְרָא / wai'yiq'ra) Elohiym (אֱלֹהִים / e'lo'him) to~LIGHT (לָאוֹר / la'or) DAY (יוֹם / yom) and~to~DARKNESS (וְלַחֹשֶׁךְ / wê'la'hho'shekh) he~did~CALL.OUT(V) (קָרָא / qa'ra) NIGHT (לָיְלָה / lai'lah) and~he~will~EXIST(V) (וַיְהִי / wai'hi) EVENING (עֶרֶב / e'rev) and~he~will~EXIST(V) (וַיְהִי / wai'hi) MORNING (בֹקֶר / vo'qer) DAY (יוֹם / yom) UNIT (אֶחָד / e'hhad)

RMT: and Elohiym called out to the light, day, and to the darkness he called out, night, and evening existed and morning existed, a day unit,
17 and~from~TREE (וּמֵעֵץ / u'mey'eyts) the~DISCERNMENT (הַדַּעַת / ha'da'at) FUNCTIONAL (טוֹב / tov) and~DYSFUNCTIONAL (וָרָע / wa'ra) NOT (לֹא / lo) you(ms)~will~EAT(V) (תֹאכַל / to'khal) FROM~him (מִמֶּנּוּ / mi'me'nu) GIVEN.THAT (כִּי / ki) in~DAY (בְּיוֹם / bê'yom) you(ms)~>~EAT(V) (אֲכָלְךָ / a'khal'kha) FROM~him (מִמֶּנּוּ / mi'me'nu) >~DIE(V) (מוֹת / mot) you(ms)~will~DIE(V) (תָּמוּת / ta'mut)

RMT: but from the tree of discernment of function and dysfunction you will not eat from him, given that in the day you eat from him you will surely die,

The word for DAY in Gen. 1 is different from the word for DAY in Gen 2


Yom is 24 hours Beyom is an age----which makes perfect sense in as much as Adam and Eve did not die in that 24 hour period---but in an age--in this case, over 900 years later.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
One day to God can be a thousand years. Even a million years. Even a billion years!


See post #78 above. Original Hebrew is a 24 hour period. A 24 hour period is not determined by the sun but by the rotation of the earth. God separated the light from the dark before He created the sun. Light consists of more than sunlight---there is what is called invisible light---such as ex-rays and such (googled it). It is invisible to the human eye---not to God's.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums