Why I'm not a young earth creationist...

Humble_Disciple said:

Are you familiar with the historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ?

Click to expand...

Yes I am. And its severly lacking.

Really really wishing something to be true does not make it true.

Humble_Disciple said:

Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Many people have died for what they believed to be true, but how many have died for what they knew to be false? The apostles were in a position to know for a fact whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, and they willingly died for their testimony.

Even if one were on the fence about the evidence for Jesus' resurrection, Pascal's wager would be reason enough to decide on the side of faith.

Click to expand...

You wanna preach there are subforas for that, this isnt one of them.

Pascals wager is incredibly stupid.

Mixing theology and science is bad science and even worse theology.

I don't often post in this section but you asked for YEC to answer so I will. This section is more for science. You won't get those type of answers from me. There is a Christian section maybe you could ask for your thread to be moved there.

Humble_Disciple said:

Nowhere does the Bible say that the earth is less than 10,000 years old.

Click to expand...

True, but neither does it say 4 billion and if it really was 4 billion how do you fit that into scripture, without claiming dozens of straightforward verses are parables or symbolism?
And if they are parables or symbols, then where are the the supporting verses for this view and how does it fit together? I have yet to find a Christian evolutionist to give me an answer on this. And I don't mean an answer I don't like, I mean any answer from scripture.

It's an assumption based on adding up the genealogies of the Bible, while assuming that the earth began with the creation of Adam and that there are no gaps in the genealogies.

Click to expand...

Not all YEC believe in 6 thousand years. I tend to feel it is more 15 but I have heard of a few who stretch things to 20 and some even to 50.
But no matter how many thousands of years a YEC gives it is nothing compared to the timeline believed by evolutionists.

6-10K was developed by James Ussher, but not all of us follow Usher. We always need to keep in mind that Scripture is one thing, but a man's teachings is something else. Many people accept 6-10 as gospel without knowing where it came from, but it is not.
A man's teaching may be very helpful but we should never take them as being equal to scripture.
The main reason I don't follow Ussher is he gave an exact date for creation (midday on October 23, 4004 BC) which says a lot of things about the man that I don't like or trust. No one can give such a date and God never said anywhere that the Bible was to be used like a calculator.

Whereas Romans 5 says that death entered the world through Adam, this refers to human death, not animal death. If it were proven that the Bible requires belief in young earth creationism, I'd seriously consider it, but not without some difficulties.

Click to expand...

Death entered the world for both humans and animals when Adam sinned because Adam's sin corrupted everything.
The entire creation is groaning not just mankind.
Romans 8:22
We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.

The main focus of creation isn't just about God making everything a short time ago, it is really about sin and God's answer for sin and what God plans for the end times.
Perfection - Corruption- Redemption-The remake of the world back to how it was.
God has a time line that ends when the full number of gentiles and 1 third of the Jewish nation have turned towards him. How can he make it back to perfection unless it originally was perfection?

If the earth is less than 10,000 years old, is there any evidence that humans and dinosaurs co-existed? The fossil record seems to contradict that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

Click to expand...

There is scripture and then there is science. Decide which you trust.
Joshua 24
"But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."

Scripture is God's breathed word to us, he alone holds the truth.
Science is man striving to make sense of the natural world around him. It is based on tests to be sure, but there are assumptions built into those tests. I choose to believe that God's is truth and that mankind as clever as he is, has many things built around incorrect assumptions.

The Bible outlines two large creatures that Job was well aware of. Behemoth
Job 40 and Leviathan Job 41. You will also find many stories of dragons around the world.
the word dinosaur is relatively new, it was invented by Richard Owen in 1841.
The Bible states that land animals were created on day 6 as were Adam and Eve. This included all animals. All at this point humans and animals were all vegetarians.
Some time later the entire world was wiped by a global flood and after this God said that mankind could hunt and eat animals and that they would have a natural fear of man because of this. Before the flood man and animals did not fear or eat each other.
The climate dramatically changed after the flood and man needed an easy source of protein. I am quite sure dinosaur eggs would have been on the menu. So the fear of man was given to animals to help their survival.
Genesis 9
2 The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
The fact that dinosaurs are extinct is nothing special or mysterious, animals go extinct all the time.

If the earth is less than 10,000 years old, how do you explain fossil fuels? Are there any petroleum geologists who are also young earth creationists?

Click to expand...

Don't assume every YEC believes in an earth younger then 10 thousand years.
I would suggest looking up a creation science site or books for those type of answers.

How do you explain distant starlight? Not only that, how do you explain the remnants of supernovae? If the earth is less than 10,000 years old, wouldn't that mean the skies contain evidence of supernovae that never happened? How would that square with Psalm 19:1?

Click to expand...

There is a very interesting book called Starlight and Time by Dr. Russell Humphreys that may interest you.

But the simple explanation is that God stretched out the stars billions of light years apart as easily as he did everything else. The light would have traveled from where God created them and named them to wherever he placed them, which I imagine all happened very quickly.

Even Answers in Genesis seems to admit that there are supernovae from before 10,000 years ago

Click to expand...

Like I said YEC differ. Don't assume there is only one view to it, like most things there are shades.

I am not a young earth creationist because these and other concerns have not been resolved, at least not to my satisfaction. Are there any young earth creationists who are able to resolve these concerns?

Click to expand...

And what about the concerns of scripture, has that also been resolved to your satisfaction? Or is that of secondary importance?
Science will never confirm the Bible nor agree with it. You need to decide whom you choose to believe, science or scripture. A marriage between the two is a sad place.

VirOptimus said:

Mixing theology and science is bad science and even worse theology.

Click to expand...

Something I can actually agree with.

Humble_Disciple said:

There is a difference between distant starlight and supernova remnants. They are two different problems that young earth creationists need to account for.

Click to expand...

You will need to ask someone who is interested in science. My main interest is in theology.

coffee4u said:

Something I can actually agree with.

Click to expand...

Then why are you a YEC?

Humble_Disciple said:

There is a difference between distant starlight and supernova remnants. They are two different problems that young earth creationists need to account for.

Click to expand...

From a former post of mine:

SN1987A: A blue supergiant star, created in BC4004 in the hollow of God's hand for the angel Sanduleak, i.e. his home. SN1987A was then 'ballooned' to the distance of 168,000 light years distance from the earth, with its starlight kept intact on the earth, when God stretched the universe.

Psalm 104:2b who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:

Circa 2300 B.C., Sanduleak leaves his home and comes to earth and marries a woman here; settling down and having [giant] children.

God destroys the world with a global flood and confines Sanduleak to:

Jude 6: And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

God then destroys Sanduleak's home (the supergiant star), circa 2345 B.C. and moves the light from its destruction across space for "discovery" on 23 February 1987.

Humble_Disciple said:

How would that square with Psalm 19:1?

Click to expand...

I believe, as do others, that the plan of salvation is in the stars.

The stars then are a pictogram of things that have taken place.

So that's why I believe God moved the light from the exploding star forward across time to show up on the earth in 1987.

Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.

He's telling us, through this supernova, that He destroyed Sanduleak's home.

Humble_Disciple said:

The Bible says, from beginning to end, that Adam is the historical father of all humanity, from whom we inherited sin and death. There are numerous passages of scripture which wouldn't make sense if Adam weren't a historical person, including Jesus' genealogy in Luke.

Secondly, Genesis says that God created the animals "each according to its kind." This seems to clearly contradict evolution.

Lastly, the evidence for natural selection acting on random mutation being responsible for the complexity and diversity of life is rather flimsy. Oscillations in the size of finch beaks and the coloring of peppered moths doesn't demonstrate the capability of evolution to produce such large-scale transitions as fish to amphibian, reptile to bird, ape to man, etc.

Furthermore, there are serious deficiencies in the fossil record. Here is a non-creationist scientist in a moment of honesty about the human fossil record:
Acclaimed fossils might not depict human evolution

Please don't assume that, just because I don't believe in evolution, I must be ignorant of science. I would at least like to believe that I know more about the evidence presented for evolution than the average person. I took anthropology in college and had to write papers on it.

The reason why I created this thread is to give young earth creationists the opportunity to convince me that the creation is less than 10,000 years old. I'm not trying to debate evolution right now. I'm giving young earth creationists the chance to state their case.

Click to expand...

There is no "assumption" that you are profoundly
ignorant of evolution and science in general.
You demonstrate it with unmistakably clarity
every time you post. Regardless of what you
like to believe.
That you so steadfastly add to the little knowledge
you have says to us, should to you, how little
inclined you are to learning anything.
Silly mistakes pointed out to you and then
here they come again.

Humble_Disciple said:

Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Many people have died for what they believed to be true, but how many have died for what they knew to be false? The apostles were in a position to know for a fact whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, and they willingly died for their testimony.

Even if one were on the fence about the evidence for Jesus' resurrection, Pascal's wager would be reason enough to decide on the side of faith.

Click to expand...

Pascale wager is why I panicked and started hiding
my hair in public!
I don't want to be hung by my hair in eternal fire!

Humble_Disciple said:

If the earth is less than 10,000 years old, is there any evidence that humans and dinosaurs co-existed?

Click to expand...

There is Biblical testimony that they did.

Behemoth and dragons, both dinosaurs, were on the Ark, along with Noah.

Humble_Disciple said:

The fossil record seems to contradict that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

Click to expand...

The fossil record has been stretched out to make it look like it developed over a long period of time.

It does say God created everything in six days.

And our Apostle Paul says creation was subjected to "futility", but later "will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (in Romans 8:20-21)

"For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (Romans 8:20-21)

So, I consider, if the earth was "subjected" to "futility", it could have been in a different state before that . . . possibly in an incorruptible spiritual state. And so could have been all the nonhuman living beings whom God created. But then Adam and Eve fell. And if all but Adam and Eve had remained in the incorruptible state, Adam and Eve could have been unable to relate with creation other than themselves. So, God could have brought all else down to Adam and Eve's level of existence so they could function on this earth the way it is.

If this is so, those six days were not like days we have now, if the spiritual state of things during creation was not like the state of creation now. And we see how ones had long lives, starting with Adam, even though they had sinned. But sin, I see, gradually shortened people's lives, with time. And possibly the earth was also changing down in quality, during that time . . . to how the earth is now with its present apparent laws of how nature works.

So, I do not assume that creation of God has always been like it is now. While there was a different condition of creation, much larger reptiles could have lived and thrived before Adam and Eve, for all I know. Ones now have said they think they might have been warm-blooded, even, or some of them. But the entry of sin could have started to bring all that down, while laws were still different, and a lot of that vegetation could have been cooked into oil and coal. And the Flood could have been as the earth was still cooling down, or spiritually changing down, somehow.

In any case, I don't assume things have always worked by predictable physical laws. I doubt our present physical laws just did some big bang in the middle of eternity; why then and not sooner if they always have done what is predictable??

So, I am open about what God knows He has been doing If He resurrected Jesus Christ's body into His glorious body on the third day, and if during the Rapture we will be resurrected "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (see 1 Corinthians 15:50-54), God could have done anything in less than six days, while creation was not in a fully physical state like it is now.

Humble_Disciple said:

The Bible says, from beginning to end, that Adam is the historical father of all humanity, from whom we inherited sin and death. There are numerous passages of scripture which wouldn't make sense if Adam weren't a historical person, including Jesus' genealogy in Luke.

Click to expand...

Ironically, Young Earth Creationists use the exact same logic to argue for Young Earth Creationism.

anna ~ grace said:

Human descriptions and memories of dragons do seem to indicate that humans saw and interacted with large, frightening, lizard-like creatures in the past.

I don’t mind an old-earth Creation belief. But archeology indicates that human civilization arose out of Iraq. And spread outward from there. How many thousands of years can be debated, but I do see fossils as evidence of a flood. Creatures in the sea would have been fossilized first, followed by larger land creatures as the waters rose, followed by humans.

Click to expand...

So why do whales, seals and sirenians, as well as sea-birds, appear late in the fossil record (after large land animals such as synapsids and dinosaurs)? Why don't ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, mosasaurs and marine turtles occur in the same rocks as trilobites?

anna ~ grace said:

It mentions them. What they are, though, is debatable.

Study “out of place fossils”. It’s a cool phenomenon. And humans, being smarter, and more agile, could have easily climbed to higher ground more easily than large animals.

Click to expand...

You ought to read about the history of floods. Humans are very vulnerable to floods; we tend to stay indoors until it is too late to escape, and we have poor night vision, which makes it difficult for us to find our way to high ground in darkness and heavy rain.

Which 'out of place fossils' are you referring to?

Humble_Disciple said:

But again, I didn't create this thread to debate evolution. Instead, I'm giving young earth creationists the chance to state their case.

Click to expand...

So, how would you define "young earth creationist"? There are proponents of "creationism" / intelligent design who do not believe this earth is 6000 years old. For example:

coffee4u said:

Not all YEC believe in 6 thousand years. I tend to feel it is more 15 but I have heard of a few who stretch things to 20 and some even to 50.
But no matter how many thousands of years a YEC gives it is nothing compared to the timeline believed by evolutionists.

Click to expand...

I too believe the current cosmos is somewhere between 10 and 15 thousand years old. Matter of fact; if one were to line up the genealogies in the Scripture; we get a little more than 13,000 earth years.

The one thing Scripture is consistent of though; is the recording of time to humans is linked to earth days. (morning evening = day) Of which this planet's orbit around the sun appears to be evident in a stable counting of "time" as we record it.

Granted there is data in the historical record that speaks of orbits of planets getting out of alignment and that many ancient civilizations believe Venus was a commit and that Jupiter and Saturn had come closer to the sun and moved away again. Thus it's possible "comet Venus" destroyed what ever planet was between Mars and Jupiter; creating the asteroid belt. Which certainly would have "messed up" the orbits of planets, at least for some time.

Now personally I think that was part of Noah's flood event as there is archeological evidence of a global meteorite layer in the fossil record which appears to be one of the catalysts for the flood; as all the fossils are on top of this layer. The current paleontological theory is that the Gulf of Mexico basin was formed by this meteor. Which also could have initiated the circumstances that commenced the continental divide.

There is a statement a creationist makes in the movie "Is Genesis history" that the flood was a judgement not only on the sin of man; but on the corruption that had spread across creation. Including what the dinosaurs had become in time.


For if wickedness being made manifest in the violence of man; the same had also become true for the animals. And we know vast changes to a "species" is possible based on what we see just in the past 150 years of dog breeding. If one can start with wolves and get tea cup poodles and St. Barnards out of the same "kind"; there's a lot of room for physical / temperament trait variance in the genome of a "kind".

So what dinosaurs became from Adam to Noah has a lot of possibilities that we don't see in the fossil record. Particularly seeing how vast majority of the fossil record only represents what was present on earth at the time of Noah's flood. We are only seeing in that record what dinosaurs had become. We aren't seeing what they were created as.

Then of course we have genetic mutations that come to be made manifest as a result of the fall. Neanderthal is an example of that. A "self limiting" example of that even; as there are no "Neanderthals" today, despite humanity still has "neanderthal DNA".

Selective breeding can also cause mutations to become more evident and compounded more "destructive". We see this today also in the dog world. How many "pure bred" dogs have copious numbers of health problems caused by their genetics. This has become such a problem that pure bred dogs are on the verge of "extinction" even despite their continued existence is supported by humans willing to care for them. (Most "pure bred" dogs would never be able to survive in the wild. That's obvious!)

So did subgroups of humans (like Neanderthal) "do this to themselves" as an experiment in self imposed selective breeding? A "mark of Cain" type of thing? Who knows? We don't have enough information on "neanderthal culture" to know what they thought of themselves. We know they were hunters, used tools, knew how to start fires, and could have drawn pictures on caves?

We also have examples in the fossil record of bipedal apes. (We have bipedal apes now.)

Yet, just another piece of the puzzle.

Humble_Disciple said:

Couldn't God create stars at any stage of development? Couldn't God create a star set to have a supernova tomorrow or the next day if he wanted to?

Click to expand...

That is possible; yet God could have also set supernovas into motion for a specific reason. (My understanding that a supernova is the death of a star, not the creation of one.)

Which brings me specifically to the point of the crucifixion. If Jesus had forsaken the atonement; there would have been no reason for time to continue. There would have (probably) been the sabbath (Saturday) and the destruction of the cosmos would have commenced Sunday morning. Every human up to that time would have been cast into the Lake of Fire and the cosmos would have been recreated solely for Christ's purposes and what He'd decided should inhabit it.

After all the incarnation of the 2nd person of the Trinity added a dimension to the Son's existence that was not eternally existent. And thus to accommodate what the Son had chosen to become a cosmos would have been created to incorporate His decision. And subsequently could have potentially been populated literally with Gods. ("Material" representations of the 2nd person of the Godhead.)

Yet Jesus went through with the atonement and thus His "progeny" are those He atoned for. Thus why Jesus produced no children in the flesh, nor do believers on the other side of eternity.

That's a whole other theological discussion though.

coffee4u said:

There is a very interesting book called Starlight and Time by Dr. Russell Humphreys that may interest you.

Click to expand...

I'll have to look this up. Haven't heard of this book before.

coffee4u said:

But the simple explanation is that God stretched out the stars billions of light years apart as easily as he did everything else. The light would have traveled from where God created them and named them to wherever he placed them, which I imagine all happened very quickly.

Click to expand...

This is possible; yet I believe there is another explanation for supernovas too.

Jumping back to what I'd just said about the completion of the atonement. In the space of "the great tribulation" where atonement was being secured; the sun was darkened for 3 hours during the crucifixion. And the moon "did not give her light". Was this a "sign in the heavens" that imminent judgement was upon the cosmos should the atonement not be completed? (That's what I think was going on; because the events of the crucifixion to the destruction of Jerusalem was a "foreshadow" of the end of time.)

So was the "outer parts" of the cosmos starting to come unraveled on the question of the completion of the atonement? And thus the evidence of that as the light reaches earth hundreds and even thousands of years later; we only now start to see?

Humble_Disciple said:

There is a difference between distant starlight and supernova remnants. They are two different problems that young earth creationists need to account for.

Click to expand...

Again though, assuming the "rules" that govern the current cosmos have always been consistent? God certainly could have (and evidently has) allowed things to "come unglued" for His purposes and the demonstration of the fact that a day of reckoning is coming.

And this is why I believe He's done that. To allow us to "see" that He is the sovereign Entity that controls all of this and that there is a day of reckoning coming. What we understand of the current cosmos will no longer exist.

For as much as men "suppress the truth in unrighteousness" there WILL be a Judgement Day.

AV1611VET said:

So that's why I believe God moved the light from the exploding star forward across time to show up on the earth in 1987.

Click to expand...

I agree that yes indeed "God moved the light from the exploding star forward across time to show up on earth in 1987." Although I don't think that had anything to do with a particular angelic being.

AV1611VET said:

He's telling us, through this supernova, that He destroyed Sanduleak's home.

Click to expand...

I know Sanduleak was the name given by astronomers to the supernova star; but I'm not aware of any "Sanduleak" named in Scripture.

com7fy8 said:

So, I consider, if the earth was "subjected" to "futility", it could have been in a different state before that . . . possibly in an incorruptible spiritual state.

Click to expand...

The only problem with earth being an "incorruptible spiritual state" is that the Son was incarnated in a material state like unto Adam. Jesus had a Divine nature, but also a flesh and blood human nature; which consisted of all the needs and capabilities of Adam. Christ had to eat, sleep, pee, poop, bathe etc. Yet Jesus was without sin.

The doctrine you quote here. sounds like a tenant of gnosticism that believes the actual material construction of the universe is "evil".

com7fy8 said:

If this is so, those six days were not like days we have now, if the spiritual state of things during creation was not like the state of creation now.

Click to expand...

Again though, the "evening morning" "day 1" 2, 3, 4 etc nature of the language in Genesis doesn't support this. The Genesis account is a narrative. It's not poetry or allegory or any other style of writing. Where as most other creation accounts outside of the Bible are written as allegory or poetry and not narrative format.

com7fy8 said:

In any case, I don't assume things have always worked by predictable physical laws. I doubt our present physical laws just did some big bang in the middle of eternity; why then and not sooner if they always have done what is predictable??

Click to expand...

Principally speaking; I agree here. Unless of course God decides to do something for His own purposes. And in all the places where we see God intervening in the laws that govern the cosmos it was always a demonstration of redemption, judgement or both.

com7fy8 said:

So, I am open about what God knows He has been doing If He resurrected Jesus Christ's body into His glorious body on the third day, and if during the Rapture we will be resurrected "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (see 1 Corinthians 15:50-54), God could have done anything in less than six days, while creation was not in a fully physical state like it is now.

Click to expand...

Best "rule of thumb" here is to keep digging through the text to see if we can find the answers to the questions we have from the text itself. The Bible is it's own dictionary, commentary and interpreter and what ever questions we have about the Bible we'll find the answer in the Bible (specifically in relation to theology). The Scripture actually tells us to compare it to itself; and not try to devise what we think it means out of our own human understanding.

And even when we do compare it to itself; we don't always get that right either. There's a lot of information in the Scripture and sometimes finding the answers requires an awful lot of digging.

I've actually "accidentally" found many things in Scripture that connect together that I wasn't even aware that they connected together. Bible "deep dives" can get complicated (and frustrating)!

Humble_Disciple said:

Many people have died for what they believed to be true, but how many have died for what they knew to be false?

Click to expand...

Perkin Warbeck? Joseph Smith?

Humble Disciple said:

The apostles were in a position to know for a fact whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, and they willingly died for their testimony.

Click to expand...

How many of the apostles were witnesses to the resurrection and died for their testimony, and what is your evidence? In the book of Acts the only personal follower of Jesus who was executed was James the brother of John (Acts of the Apostles 12:2). Stephen (Acts of the Apostles 7:54-60) wasn't a witness to the resurrection, and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts of the Apostles 5:1-11) didn't die for their testimony. The stories of the deaths of the other apostles are in the Apocrypha, not in the canonical New Testament.

com7fy8 said:

It does say God created everything in six days.

And our Apostle Paul says creation was subjected to "futility", but later "will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (in Romans 8:20-21)

"For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (Romans 8:20-21)

So, I consider, if the earth was "subjected" to "futility", it could have been in a different state before that . . . possibly in an incorruptible spiritual state. And so could have been all the nonhuman living beings whom God created. But then Adam and Eve fell. And if all but Adam and Eve had remained in the incorruptible state, Adam and Eve could have been unable to relate with creation other than themselves. So, God could have brought all else down to Adam and Eve's level of existence so they could function on this earth the way it is.

If this is so, those six days were not like days we have now, if the spiritual state of things during creation was not like the state of creation now. And we see how ones had long lives, starting with Adam, even though they had sinned. But sin, I see, gradually shortened people's lives, with time. And possibly the earth was also changing down in quality, during that time . . . to how the earth is now with its present apparent laws of how nature works.

So, I do not assume that creation of God has always been like it is now. While there was a different condition of creation, much larger reptiles could have lived and thrived before Adam and Eve, for all I know. Ones now have said they think they might have been warm-blooded, even, or some of them. But the entry of sin could have started to bring all that down, while laws were still different, and a lot of that vegetation could have been cooked into oil and coal. And the Flood could have been as the earth was still cooling down, or spiritually changing down, somehow.

In any case, I don't assume things have always worked by predictable physical laws. I doubt our present physical laws just did some big bang in the middle of eternity; why then and not sooner if they always have done what is predictable??

So, I am open about what God knows He has been doing If He resurrected Jesus Christ's body into His glorious body on the third day, and if during the Rapture we will be resurrected "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (see 1 Corinthians 15:50-54), God could have done anything in less than six days, while creation was not in a fully physical state like it is now.

Click to expand...

I would not believe anything "Paul"
( is claimed to have)said after I
read that obviously bogus snake story.