Old Earth Creation

[ps139]

Is anyone here OEC?
How old do you believe the Earth to be?
Is this the only difference between OEC and YEC?
Thanks!!

 

[InnerPhyre]

I was OEC until I took a few science classes and saw the logic of evolution. Back when I was an OEC tho I still thought the Earth was 4 billion years old.

 

[TwinCrier]

There is an evolution forum here as well: http://www.christianforums.com/f426-theistic-evolution.html This is a forum for those who believe in a biblical creation account.

 

[notto]

There is an evolution forum here as well: http://www.christianforums.com/f426-theistic-evolution.html This is a forum for those who believe in a biblical creation account.

Technically, I think you are incorrect.

Rules of this forum:

1. Only Creationist members may debate in this forum.

2. Non-creationist members may post fellowship posts in this forum but any debate posts will be removed.

Haven't seen any debate in this thread (well, accept for maybe this ).

 

[CPman2004]

I am Old Earth Creationist. I don't know all the specifics off handly, but to me it makes the most sense. However, rather I am old or new, doesn't really matter. It is still creationism, thus God created it. I won't let my faith be messed with if I think that it was a literal 6 day (24 hour) creation or a 6 day(age) creation. God still created it.

 

[Percheron]

I hate it when that happens.

 

[Percheron]

Is anyone here OEC?

Yeah, I am.

How old do you believe the Earth to be?

Old. 4 billion years, give or take.

Is this the only difference between OEC and YEC?
Thanks!!

Well, I don’t know, but I think most OEC’s also believe the Genesis flood was a fairly localized or regional event, not global in scale, and they believe in succession but not evolution. That’s me.

was OEC until I took a few science classes and saw the logic of evolution. Back when I was an OEC tho I still thought the Earth was 4 billion years old.

Let me get this straight. You’re saying you’re a young earth theistic evolutionist?

 

[Remus]

and they believe in succession

If you don't mind me asking, what is "succession"?

 

[ps139]

Let me get this straight. You’re saying you’re a young earth theistic evolutionist?

I think he used to be OEC but now is TE


So I guess this "succession" would be the biggest difference between OEC and TE?

What is succession, and how is it different than evolution?

I am trying to come to a better understanding of all these views. I believe God made everything, and that creation and evolution are synonymous. But apparently many people don't - I am trying to figure out why. So I appreciate all the answers I can get.

I think at this point I am not concerned with how old the earth is. It doesn't matter to me at all.

 

[United]

There is an evolution forum here as well: http://www.christianforums.com/f426-theistic-evolution.html This is a forum for those who believe in a biblical creation account.

Hi TwinCrier,

The original post made no reference to evolution. OEC refers to creation over long periods of time. Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the title of the forum "Creationism"? In particular, "The subforum for young earth and other creationist members". I think OEC's fits into the "other creationist members" group.

I presume you ment to write "This is a forum for those who believe in a LITERAL biblical creation account". OEC's fall into this group.

 

[United]

I think he used to be OEC but now is TE


So I guess this "succession" would be the biggest difference between OEC and TE?

What is succession, and how is it different than evolution?

I am trying to come to a better understanding of all these views. I believe God made everything, and that creation and evolution are synonymous. But apparently many people don't - I am trying to figure out why. So I appreciate all the answers I can get.

I think at this point I am not concerned with how old the earth is. It doesn't matter to me at all.

Hi there ps139,

OEC's generally take a literal interpretation of genesis 1 and 2. However, they read the translation and meaning of the six "days" of creation as six long periods of time. They generally believe God progressively created plants, animals and humans through these periods - generally in the order they are found in the fossil record. OEC's generally believe God created out of nothing.

Theistic evolutionists on the other hand, believe that God "created" through evolution.

Personally I am an OEC who is open to theistic evolution. I feel "creation out of nothing" is the most logical interpretation of Genesis - but I do not discount evolution on this basis.

 

[Micaiah]

There is an evolution forum here as well: http://www.christianforums.com/f426-theistic-evolution.html This is a forum for those who believe in a biblical creation account.

Here is a definition of Old Earth Creationist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Earth_Creationist

It seems the old earth creationists are want to distance themselves from the TE's. Some believe that the fossil record resulted from a previous creation that was annihilated during creation described in Genesis 1.

There are a range of views. I'm not sure what distinguishes them from the TE's, and at times it is hard to assess the difference, as demostrated by this discussion.

http://www.geocities.com/greeneto/gazette9.html#a322m2

I'd be interested to hear from the OEC's their interpretation. I suspect that like the TE's their views on origins are driven by the need to reconcile the record of Scripture with a perceived old earth.

I believe that God created the earth in six days, each day represented by one rotation of the earth. I believe this because that is the plain teaching of Scripture. The scientific evidence for an old earth is at best tenuous.

 

[Percheron]

If you don't mind me asking, what is "succession”?

Basically, it’s the idea that though organisms didn’t “evolve” on a macro scale, God’s creative activity unfolded progressively over time. In other words, He didn’t use a Darwinian or other evolutionary mechanism, but directly created the major types of flora/fauna, just over long periods. So there would have been flurries of creative activity followed by long non-active periods, then more creation etc. etc. Which OEC’s believe accounts for the “succession” we see in the fossil record of simpler life followed by gradually more complex, culminating with man. That’s probably not the best explanation, but hopefully you get the general idea.

So I guess this "succession" would be the biggest difference between OEC and TE?

I suppose, other than the age of the Earth and the Flood, as I previously noted. A book I highly recommend is Alan Hayward’s Creation and Evolution, if you can find it. It’s very solid. He’s an OEC. The first part of the book is a critique of Darwinism and the second pretty much dismantles (IMO) recent creationism.

What is succession, and how is it different than evolution?

Hopefully, I already answered that above to your satisfaction. If not, I can attempt further clarification.

I am trying to come to a better understanding of all these views. I believe God made everything, and that creation and evolution are synonymous. But apparently many people don't - I am trying to figure out why. So I appreciate all the answers I can get.

Well, I think that to say creation and evolution are synonymous is to make the assumption that there is a valid, practical evolutionary mechanism i.e. that evolution did occur or could have, and I don’t see the evidence for it, but I understand what you’re saying. Even if evolution happened, God made it, right? Still, direct creation is something quite different process-wise, so it’s probably not best to conflate them.

I think at this point I am not concerned with how old the earth is. It doesn't matter to me at all.

In a sense, it doesn’t matter to me either. I still know God is, and that He created everything, regardless of when, but in another sense, it matters very much to me for accuracy’s sake. It’s either old or young, and the biblical testimony/scientific evidence should reflect which and be in harmony with one another. I think it hurts the image of the faith when Christians go around insisting that something is one way and it turns out to be demonstrably the other. Though, that doesn’t bother me inordinately either, because God is sovereign, and we already know all people are fallible, so, in the final analysis, that’s not going to keep those whom God has called from being ushered into the kingdom.

 

[Micaiah]

[/color]
In a sense, it doesn’t matter to me either. I still know God is, and that He created everything, regardless of when, but in another sense, it matters very much to me for accuracy’s sake. It’s either old or young, and the biblical testimony/scientific evidence should reflect which and be in harmony with one another. I think it hurts the image of the faith when Christians go around insisting that something is one way and it turns out to be demonstrably the other. Though, that doesn’t bother me inordinately either, because God is sovereign, and we already know all people are fallible, so, in the final analysis, that’s not going to keep those whom God has called from being ushered into the kingdom.

It hurts the Christian image and disrupts the harmony and peace of Christian fellowship when people distort the plain teaching of Scripture and make it say what it does not.

 

[Percheron]

It hurts the Christian image and disrupts the harmony and peace of Christian fellowship when people distort the plain teaching of Scripture and make it say what it does not.

I agree, but if you're implying that that's what Old creationists do, I'd simply have to respectfully disagree The way I see it, Scripture is clear about Who created us, and why, but doesn't give as much detail about the when and how, though I'm a firm believer in creation and reject theistic evolution.

 

[Micaiah]

Okay. Please post the characteristic beliefs of your version of OEC, with reference to how it differs from the views of YEC's, with Scripture to support your assertions where possible.

 

[United]

It seems the old earth creationists are want to distance themselves from the TE's.

Hi Micaiah,

I personally don't want to "distance" myself from YEC's or TE's - we are all one body. I only tried to distinguish the beliefs of each group. Since coming to this forum I have been suprised by the way YEC's often group OEC's with TE's. In general OEC's take a similar literal view of the bible - just with some minor variations in the literal interpretation.

 

[United]

[/color]

Basically, it’s the idea that though organisms didn’t “evolve” on a macro scale, God’s creative activity unfolded progressively over time. In other words, He didn’t use a Darwinian or other evolutionary mechanism, but directly created the major types of flora/fauna, just over long periods. So there would have been flurries of creative activity followed by long non-active periods, then more creation etc. etc. Which OEC’s believe accounts for the “succession” we see in the fossil record of simpler life followed by gradually more complex, culminating with man. That’s probably not the best explanation, but hopefully you get the general idea.

I suppose, other than the age of the Earth and the Flood, as I previously noted. A book I highly recommend is Alan Hayward’s Creation and Evolution, if you can find it. It’s very solid. He’s an OEC. The first part of the book is a critique of Darwinism and the second pretty much dismantles (IMO) recent creationism.

Hopefully, I already answered that above to your satisfaction. If not, I can attempt further clarification.

Well, I think that to say creation and evolution are synonymous is to make the assumption that there is a valid, practical evolutionary mechanism i.e. that evolution did occur or could have, and I don’t see the evidence for it, but I understand what you’re saying. Even if evolution happened, God made it, right? Still, direct creation is something quite different process-wise, so it’s probably not best to conflate them.

In a sense, it doesn’t matter to me either. I still know God is, and that He created everything, regardless of when, but in another sense, it matters very much to me for accuracy’s sake. It’s either old or young, and the biblical testimony/scientific evidence should reflect which and be in harmony with one another. I think it hurts the image of the faith when Christians go around insisting that something is one way and it turns out to be demonstrably the other. Though, that doesn’t bother me inordinately either, because God is sovereign, and we already know all people are fallible, so, in the final analysis, that’s not going to keep those whom God has called from being ushered into the kingdom.

Hi Percheron,

Good post. I should add one thing though. Like you, I generally consider natural selection, punctuated equilibrium etc as poor explanations for the evolutionary process. I see this as a major issue for mainstream evolutionary belief, but it has no relevance for most TE's - God can can provide that mechanism. My main difficulty with theistic evolution is reconsiling it with Genesis. Not that it is impossible, only that a symbolic interpretation does not seem a particularly logical step in the biblical context.

 

[Dust and Ashes]

I was recently YEC and currently I'm somewhere between or a combination of OEC/TE. Genesis 1 simultaneously describes the creation of non-human life with "God said, let the earth bring forth..." and "God created..." often in the same verse. I personally don't have a problem with that. The only creature that I believe was created in a special way was man, because man is the only creature described with a special creation that I am aware of.

I find it very sad that this forum is quickly becoming as unwelcoming to non YECs as the old Creation/TE forum was to YECs and other creationists.

 

[Percheron]

Okay. Please post the characteristic beliefs of your version of OEC, with reference to how it differs from the views of YEC's, with Scripture to support your assertions where possible.

I think I’ve already done that, if you care to review my 2 or 3 previous posts and/or the book I mentioned. As for supporting my assertions with Scripture, I’m not sure what you’re looking for. I believe everything it says. However, my interpretation of some probably differs from a YEC such as yourself e.g. the meaning of "6 days," which is probably not something I could change your mind on anyway. Not because you're close-minded but because I'm just not the best expositor, and while I have an interest in this subject, it's not one I spend a lot of time cramming on. So I'm not an expert of any kind. If you have something more specific in mind that you’re after, you’ll just have to state it, and I'll see what I can do.

Hi Percheron,

Good post. I should add one thing though. Like you, I generally consider natural selection, punctuated equilibrium etc as poor explanations for the evolutionary process. I see this as a major issue for mainstream evolutionary belief, but it has no relevance for most TE's - God can can provide that mechanism. My main difficulty with theistic evolution is reconsiling it with Genesis. Not that it is impossible, only that a symbolic interpretation does not seem a particularly logical step in the biblical context.

Thanks, United. I agree with you about reconciling it and Genesis, and I didn’t mean to imply that God couldn’t have provided such a (evolutionary) mechanism. Still, if He had, it would seem likely that it would be discoverable or that there’d be some pretty strong, clear evidence of it in the form of transitionals, etc. which I honestly don’t think they (evolutionists) have, though many seem to have convinced themselves they do.