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.
In my experience the United States is the only nation that has a sizeable fraction of the population adopt the notion of literal and inerrant Bible. Young earth creationism tends to go along with this. Of course these people are doing their level best to export this understanding elsewhere. I wish I understood why this has happened.
Hi cimorene,
I hear you! I was just responding to your earlier post:
You said you'd never met an adult IRL who did take the creation account in Genesis literally...You then finished that thread saying that you'd only met them on this website and then claimed 'they' also believe in flat earth.
There are quite a few YEC among christians. There is even the Creation Museum in KY and the ICR website which supports only YEC. So, I'm saying that you apparently don't get out much from your small circle if you've never met anyone who is YEC IRL. Then you seemed to speak fairly all inclusively that the YEC's you had met on this site were also flat earthers. So I introduced myself and made an attempt to show that, no, there are actually a lot of YEC's that are not flat earthers. In fact, both of the groups I mentioned above to not support flat earth. If you are interested in finding out what YEC's believe and that they aren't nearly all flat earthers, here are some websites you might visit:
Answers in Genesis
Creation | Creation Ministries International
http://www.icr.org/
On this page you can find dozens of sites that support some form of either YEC or some just support the 'God created' approach. A part of the created by design group. I think it always good to at least 'know' some of the things others believe.
True story! My small group, several weeks ago, and I don't know exactly what the main subject was, we were talking about the John who wrote the Revelation of Jesus Christ. I made the comment that he had been boiled in oil before he was exiled to Patmos and you'd have thought I had a third eye on my forehead. The teacher stopped and snickered and asked me where in the world I had gotten that idea. I told him that it has long been a part of church history, where we find most of the accounts of how the original 12 came to their deaths. The Scriptures really don't tell us how the 12 disciples finally met their deaths. We get most of that information from extra-biblical sources.
We do know that John the Baptiest was beheaded and I believe there is some mention of James being put to death, but beyond that, the Scriptures don't really tell us how any of them actually died.
Now here's the part that I found amusing. Last Sunday our pastor was teaching on the Beattitudes and was dealing with the 'blessed are you who are persecuted for my names sake', and guess what? He mentioned how John of the Revelation was boiled in oil before being exiled to Patmos. Well, last night at Wednesday night dinner I asked my small group leader if he had caught it. He said that yes, absolutely he did, and he was going to go ask the pastor where he had gotten that information. The pastor gave him the same answer that I did. It has long been an accepted part of church history, most of the account being handed down by Josephus, who is a fairly well respected historian of the days of the early church being built around Israel.
There are historical records that John, before being exiled, they had first tried to kill him by boiling him alive. However, just like Hannaniah, Mishael and Azzeria, he came up out of the pot completely unscathed by the fiery hot liquid. So they exiled him instead.
So, I just say that sometimes it can be good to look into what others believe. You might come to a greater understanding yourself.
God bless,
In Christ, ted
God bless,
In Christ, ted
Hi again cimorene,
Don't mean to be pushy on the subject, but I did feel led to provide you with some evidence to think on.
According to livescience.com, 4 in 10 Americans believe the earth to be no more than 10,000 years old.
4 in 10 Americans Believe God Created Earth 10,000 Years Ago
This claim is supported by Gallup polling. This understanding of a young created earth has run steady at near 40% since 1985, but has seen some slight downward trend in the last few years. In 2009 Gallup asked the question a little differently by asking how many people believed that evolution answered how we got here or how many believe that we have existed in our present form since the beginning of time. Again there was a 40% response that held to our beginning in our present form.
Now, I see that you are from Canada, and so I did some research on what Canadians believe overall concerning the issue of a young earth.
Friendlyatheist.patheos.com makes the claim that only 21% or our northern neighbors hold to a young earth worldview. That percentage seems to also hold pretty steady among most of the Canadian specific sites that I visited. Oddly enough, when you make that query specific to Canada, most of the sites that, at least first pop up, are atheist websites. So, it could be that the atheists in Canada have done a better job of teaching others to deny the truth of God's word, than they have here in the states. That's just a thought, of course.
So, on your side of the border, it is claimed that 1 in 5 hold to a young earth worldview and on my side, it's 4 in 10. That breaks down to about 7.5 million Canadians and 132 million Americans. Just to give you some idea as to how popular or not the young earth worldview is.
God bless,
In Christ, ted
Knowledge key
Most of the people who believed in evolution also said they were knowledgeable about the theory, whereas those who said they were not too familiar with the theory also were less likely to believe in it.
Americans' belief in creationism is at odds with scientific consensus. Almost all scientists who study human origins believe that we evolved from other life-forms over millions of years. In fact, humans, or individuals in the genus Homo, are said to have emerged on Earth some 2.5 million years ago.
just that the same people who believe the Earth is flat on this forum also believe in YEC.
Bc of this forum I've become aware of the relative "popularity" of YEC belief. It's most common in the rural areas, the South, with older ppl & with those who were homeschooled by YEC parents.
The link from Live Science that you posted is 5 yrs old.
Hi cimorene,
Thanks for your response.
Oh, well that's the opposite of what you said. You said that all the YEC's you'd met also believed in flat earth. I would agree that most flat earthers are also YEC's, although there are some who do believe the earth has been flat for a zillion years.
If you don't mind staying, can I ask why you don't believe that God's accounting of the time that this realm He has created, in order that we may have life upon the earth, is true? As you do seem to have been troubled by those supporting the idea, I'll understand if you don't want to answer.
He warned Timothy that a time was coming when people would not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, he wrote, they will surround themselves by a crowd of people who will tell them what they're itching ears want to hear. So, it's just possible that you're in a large university surrounded by a crowd of people telling you what your itching ears want to hear, isn't it? Possible?
And just what do you think their clocks are based on?Why are you demanding a literal day?
astronaunts in space and submariners don't have literal days, they both use 'clocks' to measure the passing of time.
I don't. Why do you assume that all the days of creation must be 24-hour days?Why do you assume that God cannot measure the passing of time?
Remember, morning and evening are concepts that are only given meaning in the context of the earth rotating on its axis.
The title is a bit overstated. A more tempered, and personal, version would be, "I find it very difficult to believe those who say they take all of the creation account in Genesis literally."
2) In Genesis 2:17 we are told of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil." I ask myself, "What kind of tree is that? How do I form a literal conception of that kind of tree?" I challenge anyone reading my words to try, at this moment, to form a literal conception in their minds of such a tree. I contend, without having to try really hard to do so, one cannot form such a conception. Why? Because it is a metaphor. What does that fruit look like in your mind?
Here is the important part. Even if someone were able to take all of the creation account in Genesis literally, it would do them no good. What matters is not affirming its historical reliability. What matters is grasping the spiritual truths being communicated in the account, e.g. God exists, God is Creator, creation is not God, creation is good, humanity is created in the divine image, sin is a killer, humanity is in need of redemption, a promise of redemption has been made, etc.
I am Old Earth Creationist. I take it seriously. The only problems with the Genesis account is that many people dogmatically adhere to the strict 24 hour definition of Yom/Day. Essentially people have allowed the Scopes Monkey Trial to dogmatically define the Faith! Before that time, the Yom 24 hour day was generally assumed as the orthodox reading of text by the Church Fathers but this was never made any kind of an official dogma, only in Fundamentalist Christianity of the 1800s in America and later around the world was this the case.
Anyway you should read or watch some stuff by Hugh Ross. The Creation account and science and the fossil record can easily be harmonized.
And just what do you think their clocks are based on?
Thanks for proving my point.
I don't. Why do you assume that all the days of creation must be 24-hour days?
Remember, morning and evening are concepts that are only given meaning in the context of the earth rotating on its axis.
My stated position is that it is a category mistake, in that it is an attempt to reconcile scientific theories with a revelation concerning a transcendent God.
Does what I am saying make sense?
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Hello Chadrho. I think that's one of the purposes of being baptized in the Holy Spirit. It gives you a glimpse into a more real reality. God Bless
True. From our limited perspective we give our opinion. But God's perspective is much higher. God Bless
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?