- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Evidence for a Young Earth & that Man lived with Dinosaurs
- Thread starter paloma22
- Start date
- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Our senses do indicate old.
No verses indicate young.
Granted, this is documented in scripture that a "wine researcher" says this is the finest wine of any!
But what is this analyst saying? That the wine is well aged.
So
Even scripture explains that miracles happen with an age component built in.
So
Creation is, in all reality, old.
Spiritually, an entirely different matter.
Faith exists with God, outside of time.
Upvote
0
Nice to meet you, Paloma!
Um, I have a concern.
That concern is that you've posted a bunch of stuff that is well known to be hoaxes. Known among Christians to be hoaxes. And not just hoaxes, but often pretty pathetic and amateurish hoaxes. It's embarrassing to see a brother in Christ posting a lot of this, and I hope you are open to looking at some of it so as to remove things that are so embarrassing that they'll hurt your witness.
In other words, a lot of this stuff would be seen through by most seekers, and they'd (justifiably) write you off as a fool - and so would end any chance of reaching them with the Gospel.
Some right off the bat-
The existence of "living fossils" is perfectly consistent with evolution. Just as the fact that there are still real live Germans today is consistent with the fact that I descended from German immigrants.
The footprints are a well known hoax. So well known that they are a running joke, and even bringing them up only makes you a laughingstock.
"hydroplate theory" is also a joke - geologists don't take that seriously because it violates the laws of physics.
and so on. Take your time - critically look at each thing before you post it - heck, do so before you *believe* it.
Then, if you actually want to discuss creationism - post a thread in the main Christian creationism/theistic evolution area for open discussion.
In Christ-
Papias
Um, I have a concern.
That concern is that you've posted a bunch of stuff that is well known to be hoaxes. Known among Christians to be hoaxes. And not just hoaxes, but often pretty pathetic and amateurish hoaxes. It's embarrassing to see a brother in Christ posting a lot of this, and I hope you are open to looking at some of it so as to remove things that are so embarrassing that they'll hurt your witness.
In other words, a lot of this stuff would be seen through by most seekers, and they'd (justifiably) write you off as a fool - and so would end any chance of reaching them with the Gospel.
Some right off the bat-
The existence of "living fossils" is perfectly consistent with evolution. Just as the fact that there are still real live Germans today is consistent with the fact that I descended from German immigrants.
The footprints are a well known hoax. So well known that they are a running joke, and even bringing them up only makes you a laughingstock.
"hydroplate theory" is also a joke - geologists don't take that seriously because it violates the laws of physics.
and so on. Take your time - critically look at each thing before you post it - heck, do so before you *believe* it.
Then, if you actually want to discuss creationism - post a thread in the main Christian creationism/theistic evolution area for open discussion.
In Christ-
Papias
Upvote
0
It's a big no-no here for you to claim fellow Christians who do not share your views are gong to Hell, or really that anyone is going to Hell because they don't share your version of teh Bible. But to be expected. The SOP of the Bible Belt is that any scholar, no matter how much solid evidence they present, who dares disagree with the fundamentalist version of the Bible, is to be written off immediately as a child of the Devil, ignorant, you name it.
Upvote
0
All of Genesis indicates a young world and a young mankind. You cannot read the Old Testament and fit in millions of years of human history without destroying the Bible. God created something in 6 days that has the appearance of great age, very simple but in fact in quite young. Your welcome to choose an interpretation of something that is in the minds of men over the revelation of God. How pretel can you prove the earth is old? Destroying Genesis destroys the foundation of the Bible.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I'm not destroying anything. That's a Ken Ham-ism
who is a paid member of an organization dedicated
to making income from the general public. In the
area of 2 million net profit a year, Ken thanks you.
I'm just noting that the plain and simple reading of
the description of the Garden of Eden, man from dirt
or dust, stars in the sky, sun burning stable and cool,
no molten lava, all suggest the earth was more than
7 days old after creation week.
We should expect it to give every indication of being
ancient. Even if the convoluted mess of
genealogy given adds up to a smaller number.
How many foundational truths in scripture require a
calculator or are not repeated by multiple authors?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Hoghead, you completely miss understood my statements. If you don't accept the salvation of Grace, the sacrifice of Jesus, then your going to be seperated from God forever. If you reject the Gospel, your in trouble. If anyone wants to believe in "evolution" that's another issue completely. What I said was, atheistc evoltuion, is taking untold numbers to hell, because by definition, this paradigm rejects the Gospel. There is no need for God, as we are nothing more than a cosmic accident floating in space.
Because of this erroneous worldview taking over main stream science, because they promote it as "fact" when in fact nothing could be further from the truth, millions of people have swallowed the lie hook line and sinker and therefore reject the gospel. Macro evolution has NOT been proven in any degree, and we don't see it in the field-- micro has and we do see it in the field. The Bible teaches micro EV ( created "kinds" that adapt and change within strick limits but stay true to thier kind)
Do you understand?
Upvote
0
What I clearly understand that that you are working out of the Bible Belt and its SOP, which is that any scholar, fellow Christian or otherwise, who dares disagree with the fundamentalist version of teh Bible is automatically a child of the Devil, bound for Hell, you name it. Do you understand that fundamentalism is only one branch of Christianity, that there are other forms of Christianity which do not share the fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible and for good reason?
Upvote
0
Hi there Papias,
Nice to meet you. Let me try and explain a little more my position and some of your comments. I use an iPad so repliing is a little difficult at times.
Can you specify what you beleive to be a hoax? Yes, Christains and evolutionsits have occasional fallen prey to hoaxes, over the years, this is unfortunate. We recognize this and try to avoid the bad data, but this fact does not negate the argument. Please point out what is a hoax of what I have posted. I will review it. I don't recall any foot prints but again let me know exactly which ones you don't like. There are many streams of evidence for a young earth amd that man walked with dinosaurs.
You are wrong about living fossils dear brother and have fallen for the assumptions of the long agers. They are an amazing evidence for a young earth! Utterly amazing. You must just retrain your mind to see another perspecitve. Let me explain. It's all in how you interprete the evidence friend. You see old, I see young. You can't prove yours any more than I can prove mine. But when you start to uncover the multitude of evidence streams from multiple disciplines, a pattern starts to develope.
The reason we are still seeing "dinosuars" aka living fossils , is becasue the world is young and these creatures lived not so long ago. Many have died out ( as they still are today) do to many factors. Since the flood, the world has changed so drastically from "what was" that many creatures have died out. The bigger dinos could not survive in he new world. Climate changed, weather changed, food changed, man killed many as we kill "man eaters" today. We loose many species everyday, and have been since the 8 departed the Ark. Hundreds of these creatures live today with more being discovered every year.
The fossil record shows no evidence of macro evolution only micro ( which the bible clearly predicts) , only abrupt appearance. Ceolcanths survived since the flood so well becasue in part they live in very isolation conditions so deep in the ocean. Same fish since creation as outlined in the GENESIS. No need for any theory of evolution.
Who are you going to trust God or man?
I will address stour others point in a another post. Ipad acting funny. Thanks for the comments frriend.
Blessing.
And yes, the Gospel is most important thing in which I would always emphasize.
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
Yes, but please remember you are trusting your, underline "your," interpretation of the Bible. As far a hoaxes go, there have been a number perpetuated by creation-science people. One was the moon-dust argument. The other was the footprints-with-dinosaurs argument. The latter was proved wrong because, carefully examined, there are no human prints there. Even creation-science people admit they were wrong here, yet more than one still pushes this argument. Another hoax is that Darwin's work with the finches was absolutely central to his theory and that he misidentified the species. There is absolutely no evidence the finches played a central role. Furthermore, Darwin only gave them a temporary classification. He left the final say to a world-class ornithologist who concluded there were actually more species than Darwin thought. Creation-science people started a rumor that Haeckel faked his famous woodcuts of the fetuses and got fired. Forget it. He never got fired. HIs work is just about identical with what modern photography of the fetuses of humans and animal will show.
Upvote
0
Are you sure about that brother? Is that the true truth? Nope. Lol, I am from Canada. Cold up here right now. What's a SOP?
Sorry brother my snappy tone, let start fresh and
"Come reason togther" Isaiah 1:18
What other kind of a Christian would anyone want to be but a fundamentalist? I mean really. Do you not subscribe to the fundamentals of the Christian faith?
Do you believe in real Sin that will send us to real Hell?, real Sacrifice?, real Repentance?, real Grace etc? These are a few fundamentals.
I have never said that you have to beleive any version of what I say to get into heaven.
The Gospel saves period. All else is peripheral discussion amongst brothers
BUT FOR SOME PEOPLE
the issues in Genesis and exodus cause them not NOT find Jesus. These people must be found. ( the implied young earth, the flood, Babel, exodus etc...) these "stories" have been made into fabels and they are not. They are history and there is proof.
GOOD proof.
I have been researching this for 20 years and have been blown away. It's much more than I thought. Large evidence streams all connected.
So what I am posting here is the evidence that Genesis, and science are in perfect aliment. No worries. this stuff is very cool. I think I have solved the Bigfoot mystery and it's connected to the Bible. Very neat stuff.
A clear reading of Genesis ( keeping in mind all known literary devices ) clearly shows that man-kinds creation and history is very recent. That's all the actual records show. There is also incredible evidence that man lived with "dinoaurs" and we still do today, with living fossils!
It all makes perfect sense.
But I am not telling you you have to beleive this stuff! No! But if Genesis or "evolution" is stopping you from finding Jesus then you need this information.
Many Christians have been lured away from this simple explanation thst fits all the data. There is no need to invoke macro ages when short ages will do just nicely. (Occam's razor)
Anyway rant off.
Peace friend
Again sorry if I came across snappy. Hard to tell sometimes who's who on the web.
Paloma
Upvote
0
Yes lots hoaxs, yes, (evolutionists have had a few high profiles ones too. ;-) ) But we can't throw out the baby with the bath water. We have a TON of non-fake evidence. We don't need to dwell on the odd mix ups, I've moved on from a few pieces of evidence, but some are very hard to tell if they are real or not from "web research". Many of the interpretations of the evidence are contested. Many conclusions use assumptions. So there's lots of real wiggle room.
Did you watch that very first post video? It's great.
Look at the evidence in the light of Genesis being taken at face value, talking animals and all. All the data fits just as good as our old earth brothers.
Never heard about what you said about darwin. Sounds interesting. Can you explain more I did not get the full picture.
"Creation science people started rumors... " you can't tar and feather us all for a few odd apples. So one guy sins and you throw out the whole idea evidence and all?
How many ways are there to interpret it? Is there a number? I only see one way to get it. What's yours? How many do you have?
I don't necessarily want you to beleive MY interpretation of the data, but the Bibles. I did not come up with this. I have stumbled upon it by the fact that I am avid researcher. Using all known literary devices, a straightforward reading this is what it says but the cool thing is the evidence can be nicely interpreted this way.
Edit: Evolutionsts and long agers interprete it another way. We both can't be right however. The law of non contradiction will not allow this. I feel after all my research our theories are far superior than theirs. Thats what is boils down to. My version happens to be supported by the Bible, Moses AND Jesus.
Blessings.
Paloma
Last edited:
Upvote
0
SkyWriting,
I also apolize to you if I have been snippy. Let's start fresh.
Ken hams ministry lead me to Christ. Need I say more?
His ministy is huge and requires money to run it. That's ok tho how else could one run ministry of that size. That ethical to do so. Given the nature of the gospel, I think God is blessing his ministry. Have you seen the life size ark being build? It's amazing. Going down soon to see it. If God gave me a million dollars I would start a ministy with it too, why not ken? He's a nice guy apparently. My buddy met him. They know the gospel. That's important. The most important thing. They lead people to the Gospel with this message and science, nicely, is on their side.
Understanding and knowing this perspective is so freeing it's hard to put into words. God is wonderful.
Let's pretend your God and you can speak a universe into existance. Let's say you do it in 7 days. What does that look like on the ground? The optics. Matter must have literally popped out of thin air. Like a big bag. Is that like taking out endless fish from of bag?
The earth would "look" old but not be. God just created it. That's what the text says anyways. It could all happen very quickly. This solves the star light problem as well interestingly...more on that later. He set our work pattern right from the very beginning.
The only reason we beleive this now is be we have capitulated to the very strong lobby voice of the old earth/evolution slant.
It's no coinsidence that Genesis is probably most attacked book of the bible. For good reason. Attack the root and the plant dies. Satan knows the value of Genesis. Hollywood just destroyed the story of Noah with that last Russell crow version. Unbelievable. Nothing short of satanic.
The Gospel is in Genesis.
JESUS supported Genesis
Moses supported Genesis.
I did a little research into the genealogies issues, big subject, will do that soon. But the fact that detailed records survived at all are amazing. I don't know what the issues are but thanks for the tip I will look into that.
Blessings
Paloma
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I am not saying that the hydroplate theory has all the answers or has everything right but there is some very interesting aspects to it. Reading this somewhat critical article of it now, from our side no less! We don't claim to have all the answers. And we get stuff wromg too.
https://answersingenesis.org/the-fl...y-date-the-flood-within-the-hydroplate-model/
Ps am I not in the right room to post information on creationism? I forgot to post a tag? I have looked at all I post. I don't randomly post stuff. I can only post on night shift as I have a real computer not ipad.
https://answersingenesis.org/the-fl...y-date-the-flood-within-the-hydroplate-model/
Ps am I not in the right room to post information on creationism? I forgot to post a tag? I have looked at all I post. I don't randomly post stuff. I can only post on night shift as I have a real computer not ipad.
Last edited:
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
If I were you, I would carefully check out Ham's degrees. I think you will find more than one is bogus. Right there, big turn off for me.SkyWriting,
I also apolize to you if I have been snippy. Let's start fresh.
Ken hams ministry lead me to Christ. Need I say more?
His ministy is huge and requires money to run it. That's ok tho how else could one run ministry of that size. That ethical to do so. Given the nature of the gospel, I think God is blessing his ministry. Have you seen the life size ark being build? It's amazing. Going down soon to see it. If God gave me a million dollars I would start a ministy with it too, why not ken? He's a nice guy apparently. My buddy met him. They know the gospel. That's important. The most important thing. They lead people to the Gospel with this message and science, nicely, is on their side.
Understanding and knowing this perspective is so freeing it's hard to put into words. God is wonderful.
Let's pretend your God and you can speak a universe into existance. Let's say you do it in 7 days. What does that look like on the ground? The optics. Matter must have literally popped out of thin air. Like a big bag. Is that like taking out endless fish from of bag?
The earth would "look" old but not be. God just created it. That's what the text says anyways. It could all happen very quickly. This solves the star light problem as well interestingly...more on that later. He set our work pattern right from the very beginning.
The only reason we beleive this now is be we have capitulated to the very strong lobby voice of the old earth/evolution slant.
It's no coinsidence that Genesis is probably most attacked book of the bible. For good reason. Attack the root and the plant dies. Satan knows the value of Genesis. Hollywood just destroyed the story of Noah with that last Russell crow version. Unbelievable. Nothing short of satanic.
The Gospel is in Genesis.
JESUS supported Genesis
Moses supported Genesis.
I did a little research into the genealogies issues, big subject, will do that soon. But the fact that detailed records survived at all are amazing. I don't know what the issues are but thanks for the tip I will look into that.
Blessings
Paloma
Upvote
0
Yes lots hoaxs, yes, (evolutionists have had a few high profiles ones too. ;-) ) But we can't throw out the baby with the bath water. We have a TON of non-fake evidence. We don't need to dwell on the odd mix ups, I've moved on from a few pieces of evidence, but some are very hard to tell if they are real or not from "web research". Many of the interpretations of the evidence are contested. Many conclusions use assumptions. So there's lots of real wiggle room.
Did you watch that very first post video? It's great.
Look at the evidence in the light of Genesis being taken at face value, talking animals and all. All the data fits just as good as our old earth brothers.
Never heard about what you said about darwin. Sounds interesting. Can you explain more I did not get the full picture.
"Creation science people started rumors... " you can't tar and feather us all for a few odd apples. So one guy sins and you throw out the whole idea evidence and all?
How many ways are there to interpret it? Is there a number? I only see one way to get it. What's yours? How many do you have?
I don't necessarily want you to beleive MY interpretation of the data, but the Bibles. I did not come up with this. I have stumbled upon it by the fact that I am avid researcher. Using all known literary devices, a straightforward reading this is what it says but the cool thing is the evidence can be nicely interpreted this way.
Edit: Evolutionsts and long agers interprete it another way. We both can't be right however. The law of non contradiction will not allow this. I feel after all my research our theories are far superior than theirs. Thats what is boils down to. My version happens to be supported by the Bible, Moses AND Jesus.
Blessings.
Paloma
No, what you came up with is your, underscore your interpretation of the Bible. Whether it is right or not is another story. There are other alternatives. Whether your version of teh Bible is supposted by the Bible, Moses, and Jesus yet remains to be seen. I know I sure would question it. No, your research is in no way superior that that of the scientists. Do you honestly think that you, as a lay person, really do know so much more about it than the scientists do? If so, either your are paranoid delusional or have one of the worst cases of hubris ever. I am quite serious about that. Probably, you have inadvertently fallen into the current fad. Today everyone is mistrustful, paranoid. The "in" thing to do is to se conspiracies everywhere. The public goes into a feeding frenzy over that kind of junk food. Look how the mass media blitzes us with all those conspiracy shows. Sure, now we know Princess D was murdered. Sure, now we know the moon landing was a fake, a cover-up by all those godless scientists at NASA. Sure, we know archaeology is all wrong. Sure , we know as a fact that ancient aliens build the pyramids. On and on it goes. So, why not cash in, get on the band wagon, and argue evolution all a big fake from the scientific community? Creation-science is really a huge propaganda machine run by individuals making a dishonest living by presenting the public with deliberately falsified information that feed the public's insatiable craving for yellow-dog, sensationalist journalism. I say that, because I have long and carefully studied creation-science and I find it comes nowhere near the criteria for being a true scientific discipline. There is simply too much funny business., too much illegitimate behavior. Here are just a few of the many major behaviors I find suspicious. It is illegitimate to present bogus credentials. It is illegitimate to plagiarize. it is illegitimate to present as definitive the unqualified judgments of unqualified persons on sensitive, complex scientific and theological issues. It is illegitimate to present your religious beliefs as beyond question. it is illegitimate to present your religious convictions as the sole criterion from which to judge the validity of scientific findings and research. It is illegitimate to push data you know to be bogus. Creation-science people themselves, as I noted earlie4r, admit that the moon-dust argument and human-footprints-among-the dinosaurs are bogus, yet the community still present them. It is illegitimate and sinful to spread false rumors. I already provided you one example with Haeckel. Another is the argument about Darwin's finches, which floats all over the place here. As I said before , no, Darwin did not misclassify the finches. No, they were not central in the formulation of his thesis. NO, the Grants did not disprove that Darwin's finches represented truly different species. NO, Darwin did not come up with the notion of natural selection, survival of the fittest. His colleague, AR Wallace, did and then suggested it to Darwin. No, arguments presented by organizations with a definite political agenda are not objective science. The Discovery Institute, for example, had its funding yanked by teh Templeton Foundation, because it was not coming up with any truly scientific research. The Bullit Foundation pulled its grant, saying the institute was the "institutionalized love child of Ayn Rand and Jerry Falwell. I've already told you, I think, about how their claim 700 scientists are behind them is more than a wee bit biased. No, it is not objective science or solid biblical scholarship to assume that any scholar who dares disagree in the slightest with the fundamentalist version of the Bible is automatically a lost soul, you name it. And that's just a few of my criticisms. What you believe is your choice. If you want to go with creation-science, that is your right. But don't try and convince me you are going on solid science or theology.
Upvote
0
What part of Canada are you from? I may be a neighbor. I live in the Land of the Midnight Sun, 200 miles short of the Arctic Circle, northernmost city of the US.
SOP means standard operating procedure.
No, I and many other fellow Christians do not want to live as fundamentalists. Yes, I respect fundamentalists. They represent a major branch of Christianity. Granted, it works for many. But not for me or many others. It did not even begin to meet my spiritual and intellectual needs. Not all Christians are on the right or should be. I simply found fundamentalism to be too intolerant and too anti-intellectual. Christianity is not a monolithic religion, not just one way. Christianity is a rich plurality, a rich tapestry of diverse approaches which often do conflict with one another. That's because no one approach can or will work for everyone. Fundamentalists seem to forget that and assume only fundamentalists are saved. I beg to disagree. I know many have gone into a state of spiritual confusion, which is now a psychiatric entry or category, over the plurality of Christianity. But I love it, I like it, I want some more of it. It means freedom, we have choices. If one church does not work for you, you can try another down the street. NO two people are alike. No one theology will satisfy everyone. One God, many paths. Different strokes for different folks. I value a healthy skepticism about tradition, an emphasis on creativity, personal experience as far more important that doctrine or dogma, and interfaith, interreligious dialogues in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Look, nobody comes to Scripture, with a blank mind. Everyone views Scripture through a lens. For many Christians, that lens is the one created by unquestioning obedience to traditional church dogmas. Many come to Scripture with the idea firmly implanted in their minds that Scripture has to be inerrant. The way the Bible says things happened is exactly the way they did. No question about it. Works well for many laity. But it does not at all work well in modern biblical studies. here, one needs to come to Scripture, with a far more open mind. One needs to view Scripture through the lens crated by a healthy skepticism about tradition. Maybe Scripture is inerrant, maybe be not. Let's see. The inerrancy theory of Scripture is just that, a fallible, human-made theory about how God and Scripture may be related. Like any theory, it should be tested out. Fundamentalists, I find, are unwilling to do that. Maybe fine for them, but not for me. Now, I submit that when it is tested out, it fails to hold water. Certainly not all, but some biblical claims are subject to scientific testing and should be so tested. One is the biblical cosmology. Now with its flat earth, geocentric view of teh cosmos, and six0day creation, the Bible does not prove at all to be an accurate scientific witness. Conclusion: God did not intend Scripture to be a science book or scientifically accurate cosmology. As Calvin once said, God did not intend to give us an astronomy lesson. And just why shou ld have God? Divinely inspired as it may be, the Bible is the product of a prescientific culture. God always works with the grain, not over and against it. God can only move as fast as we are ready. So it would make no sense to assume God revealed to the biblical writers advanced scientific knowledge, as they would have not understood it or what to do with it. of course, to the Bible Belt, all this is heresy and blasphemy. But that is their problem, not mine.
Upvote
0
- Oct 4, 2010
- 13,243
- 6,313
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Hi Paloma,
I just wanted to add that this 'appearance of great age' is a manmade concept. Skywriting writes that dust infers old. Now, I'm going to assume that skywriting is thinking of dusting around the house as what the Scriptures infer as 'dust'. I'm not so convinced. Dust is merely fine dirt. When we drive down a dirt road we raise up a 'cloud of dust'. It isn't dust because it's old, but rather dust because it is the finer particles of dirt that are thrown up by our tires and the air movement created by the passing vehicle. Skywriting believes that dust is byproduct of years of breaking down dirt. For me, dust is merely the finer particles of dirt and was created as a part of the outer shell of the earth just as much as the rocks and sand and other soil types were created to make the earth what it is.
So, his concept and understanding of dust infers that age must have passed for dust to be present. Similarly, those who look at the layers that make up the earth's crust have a conceptual understanding that those layers were laid down by many, many years of settling and such in the earth's crust.
My understanding is that God is wiser than he or I or you could ever think to imagine. God knew before He even spoke the first, 'let there be...' what would be required as the physical makeup of the ball of planet that He called the earth in order for it to exist and to sustain life. He knew that plants would be supported by a root system that would be tied to the dirt layer on the outer shell of the planet. We know that plants don't grow well in clay or hard packed soils and so in order for plants to grow, God would have need to provide the finer, less compacted components of soil from the very beginning. God knew that we would need air to breathe and designed a perfect system whereby the plants give off what we need and we give off what the plants need. Pretty cool, huh? So, for me, all this talk about components of the earth indicating that the earth is 'aged' don't really hold up. What we understand about the make up of the earth indicating age is merely a figment of some imaginations based on the fact that, yes, if we were to turn rocks into dirt and dirt into dust that it would take a long, long time. But, for God, He merely speaks and His wisdom is perfect and complete and He makes all things just as they need to be made to perform the function for which they were created. If the earth needed dirt or dust or rocks or magma or strata to be what it is, then God created it with all those things in place on the day of creation.
It really boils down to one's worldview. How did the earth come to exist? Was it made perfect with all its component parts pretty much just as we see them today by a God with such good and perfect wisdom that He allowed for every conceivable component to be what it was on the day of creation? Or, was the earth created from some giant ball of matter that exploded out of some as yet unknown or unexplainable star or matter and over billions and billions of years the water and tides and rain broke up that ball of matter into what we see as the makeup of the earth today?
God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
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
Similar threads
