• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Am I really an Old Earth Creationist?

Status
Not open for further replies.

rglencheek

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2004
1,391
63
67
Fredericksburg, VA
✟1,848.00
Faith
Catholic
I believe that God created the universe, life and mankind, and He has a purpose to each.

I believe that He took billions of years to do these things because time is of no concern to Him, as space is of no concern.

He used a guided evolutionary process to develop life, and when things were appropriate, He made mankind.

I think of myself as an Old Earth Creationist since I insist that the universe, life and mankind are of Gods design and making.

Am I wrong for using this title for myself?

:confused:
 

Biarien

Dúnadan
Mar 19, 2004
2,054
303
California
✟26,270.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
rglencheek said:
I believe that God created the universe, life and mankind, and He has a purpose to each.

I believe that He took billions of years to do these things because time is of no concern to Him, as space is of no concern.

He used a guided evolutionary process to develop life, and when things were appropriate, He made mankind.

I think of myself as an Old Earth Creationist since I insist that the universe, life and mankind are of Gods design and making.

Am I wrong for using this title for myself?

:confused:

IMO, you may be wrong for using this title. It really depends on your answer to the question I have about the bolded portion of your post.

Question: Did God create man through evolution?

If yes, you are a theistic evolutionist, which is still an OEC, but more specific.

If no, you are an OEC but not a theistic evolutionist, so you're right in calling yourself that.

That is my understanding of the issue. My apologies if I am unclear (or just wrong!) on anything. Hopefully someone will confirm or correct this post.
 
Upvote 0

rglencheek

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2004
1,391
63
67
Fredericksburg, VA
✟1,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Yes, I think God used an evolutionary process to bring about a suitable physical form, and then ensouled the human race. Archeological evidence suggests, IIRC, that there was an explosion of technological advancement about the time they think human beings gained speech capability, and my suspicion is that marks the time of ensoulment.

But, at the same time, I think it is critical to emphasize GOD DID IT, and it was not a result of an impersonal random process.

Could God have done it exactly the way it is described in Genesis? Yes.

I just dont think He did.
 
Upvote 0

rmwilliamsll

avid reader
Mar 19, 2004
6,006
334
✟7,946.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
there are several interesting lists of positions in the creation evolution design debate. here is my personal favorite:

Spectrum of views on origins
Note: Many people don't fall into any one category below, but allow for some range of possibilities, and a mixture of scenarios.

1a. Ancient Near East Cosmology. A literal reading Genesis 1-2, and other Old Testmament passages, describes a flat earth with a solid-dome "firmament" above the sky holding back the "waters above the earth." This is how the Old-Testament-era Hebrews and surrounding cultures pictured the world.
1b. "Modern" Flat Earth. Genesis 1-2 and other scriptures are interpreted as requiring belief in a flat earth fixed in place, but words refering to the solid firmament and waters above the earth are interpreted differently than in Ancienct Near East cosmology.
1c. Geocentrism The earth is spherical, but Genesis 1-2 and other scriptures are interpreted as requiring the belief that the earth is fixed and doesn't move. The sun, moon, planets, and stars all move around the earth.

2a. Young Earth Creation: Appearance of Youth. The modern scientific (sun-centered) picture of the solar system is accepted, but the scientific picture of geological and biological history is disputed. Genesis 1-2 is interpreted as recent literal history; the earth and the universe are a few tens of thousands of years old. (References to the firmament and waters above the earth are interpreted in a variety of ways.) Although some "appearance of age" may have been included in creation (e.g. active stars, light from the stars "on its way" to earth), proper scientific measurements would yield ample evidence that the earth and life were recently created.
2b. Young Earth Creation: Created with Apparent Age. Genesis 1-2 is interpreted as recent literal history; the earth and the universe are a few tens of thousands of years old. However, the universe and the earth were made to "appear" several billion years old, so scientific measurements measure only apparent age, not actual age.
2c. Young Earth Creation: Apparent Age Due to the Fall. Genesis 1-2 is interpreted as recent literal history; the earth and the universe are a few tens of thousands of years old. However, due either to the fall of man or the fall of Satan, the earth was made to appear "old."

3a. Progressive Creation with Special Creation of Each Lifeform. The earth and the universe are several billion years old. At various times during the creation period, God performed a distinctive miraculous creation to produce each new lifeform. (De novo creation or supernatural transformation of an existing lifeform.)
3b. Progressive Creation. The earth and the universe are several billion years old. At various times during the creation period, God performed distinctive miraculous acts to produce lifeforms with certain new features or increased complexity. (Microevolution can produce some amount of species diversity, but novel biological or biochemical structures were specially and miraculously created at the appropriate times. (e.g. perhaps through miraculous genetic transformations in zygotes.))
3c. Progressive Creation through "Miraculous" Evolution. Creation occurred through evolution, but the success of evolution is "surprising;" that is, one would not have expected the evolutionary process to be as successful as it has been. Thus God must have been "directing" the evolutionary process, perhaps arranging (or pre- arranging) for the process to travel along preordained paths, leading to much better-than-expected outcomes.

4a. Evolutionary Creation with Special Creation of First Life. Creation occurred through evolution and there is nothing surprising about its success -- we would expect evolution to produce something like what we see. Nevertheless, creation occurred at God's hand and evolution was the tool. However, the fact that biological evolution got started in the first place is surprising, and that suggests a miraculous creation of first life.
4b. Evolutionary Creation. Creation occurred through evolution and there is nothing surprising about its success; nor is it surprising that life got started in the first place. We should expect abiogenesis and evolution to produce something like what we see. God designed the natural laws of the universe to be just right for successful abiogenesis and biological evolutionary. God's governance of those natural processes is pictured in a variety of ways:
4b1. Evolutionary Creation with Programmed Outcome. The laws which govern biochemistry and biological evolution are designed to ensure that life will "self-organize" into certain kinds of lifeforms. God ordained and intended our existence, and designed the process to achieve it.
4b2. Evolutionary Creation with Chosen Outcome. Biological evolution could, in theory, have followed many different paths with divergent outcomes. However, the exact path which evolution took on earth, and the final outcome we see today, were entirely ordained by God, since every event which appears to be "chance" to us is actually determined by God.
4b3. Evolutionary Creation with Flexible Outcome. The exact path which evolution took on earth, and the final outcome we see today, were not entirely predetermined by God; rather, God gave his creation a certain degree of "freedom." God also knew that this process would eventually produce intelligent, personal creatures to whom he could reveal Himself.
4c. Evolutionary Creation Known only via Special Revelation. The fact that "the natural laws of the universe gave rise to a successful evolutionary process" is not really surprising, and this is not by itself very good evidence for God's design. Nevertheless, we believe that creation occurred through God's hand because of God's special revelation.

5. Deistic Evolution. God created the universe and the laws of nature, "set them in motion," and let them "do their thing" without any intervention or meaningful governance.

6. Atheistic Evolution. The universe is self-existing; there is no creator. (There are, of course, many philosophically different varieties of atheistic evolution. They would require yet another "spectrum" to differentiate.)
i still haven't passed the magical 15 posts so i can't post the link to this, it is NOT my work, so google a phrase for its location.

if you note, the evolutionary creationist position has a series of rather interesting nuances.

the division is far more complex than just the age of the earth which by definition is the dividing line between YEC and OEC. a lot of it revolves around how you believe God does operate within the creation.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,125
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
rglencheek said:
I believe that God created the universe, life and mankind, and He has a purpose to each.

I believe that He took billions of years to do these things because time is of no concern to Him, as space is of no concern.

He used a guided evolutionary process to develop life, and when things were appropriate, He made mankind.

I think of myself as an Old Earth Creationist since I insist that the universe, life and mankind are of Gods design and making.

Am I wrong for using this title for myself?

:confused:

You sound liek a theistic evolutionist. Old Earth Creationists do not believe in biological evolution.
 
Upvote 0

rglencheek

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2004
1,391
63
67
Fredericksburg, VA
✟1,848.00
Faith
Catholic
ThePhoenix said:
Why does that so sound like the opening to a militant atheist attacking christianity? "You are an old earth creationist. Creationism is proven invalid. Therefore you can't believe God created anything and still be respected."
Yes, that does sound very militant to me - who said it?
 
Upvote 0
May 24, 2004
6
1
✟131.00
Faith
Calvinist
OEC - Someone who believes that God created man without evolution, but did it many billions of years ago.

YEC - Someone who believes that God created man without evolution, and took the amount of time described in the OT.

TEVO - (Theistic evolutionist) Someone who believe that God guided evolution to form the earth.

rglencheek, you are a TEVO. OEC's do not believe evolution.
 
Upvote 0

MagusAlbertus

custom user title
Aug 25, 2003
1,019
24
Edinburg TX
Visit site
✟1,310.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
rglencheek said:
Yes, that does sound very militant to me - who said it?


Standard form from an atheist.



I'm an OEC, I believe that God created man through evolution, and I believe that the bible is 100% literally correct.



People have trouble with authority coming from the bible... it makes them uncomfortable that they aren’t following the heart of Christ, or that they can't take on faith the will of God as written.. So they come up with things like evolution to dismiss belief in the bible.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I am inclined to think that Old earth creationist is an impossible compromise with naturalistic assumptions. Must Christians now abandon the time held belief that God created the world, the living creatures, and man in an instant to be considered sensible? Because that is exactly what it has come down to and I for one find it as about as appealing as worshiping a graven image.

While parts of evolution, radiometric dating, and fossil evidence are compelling they are far from conclusive. I do respect the modern evolutionists for one thing, they are systematic and disciplined in their approach to natural science. However, it is completely unwarranted for me to discard my faith in the incomperable power of God to speak the universe and everyliving creature into existance.

Do I have a problem with someone calling themself an old earth creationist? Absolutly not. I don't have a problem with people that say that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ or that you can't be 'saved' without water baptism, but I don't believe them either. If OEC thinking is the best you can do to reconcile God's providance in the natural world then that's your buisness and you have only God and your own conscious to consider. If you have imbraced both the Gospel and the reasoning of modern science and it does not hinder you in your Christain walk or personal faith I have no problem with it.

Grace and peace,
Mark

I just wanted to share my thoughts on the subject and in no way should it be considered a rebuke.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.