Old Earth Creationism

[GenemZ]

I'm not a YEC but I don't dispute them. I simply don't know how old the earth is and I'm skeptical that anyone actually does

We have no need to know. Other than Genesis 1:2 indicates its older than this current created world.

Interesting to note.. We are now living in a creation that in the future will be seen as a forgotten 'prehistoric' world.

“See, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind." Isa 65:17​

That's to show us how God operates as He unfolds through His creations advancements in knowledge of Himself.

The prehistoric realm was God's classroom for the angels. Isa 65 speaks of the Millennial reign on the new created earth.. This present creation we live in will be unknown and be prehistoric to those born and living on earth at that time.

 

[GenemZ]

For readers who are not familiar with Answers in Genesis and their habitual dishonesty, this article is shockingly dishonest!

Your side any better?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Like someone else said this has become an argument for those who just have a need to argue. I'm always open to the possibility that I am wrong. Don't know about you. But when God met with Moses face to face was that a figure of speech? A few verses later God says no one can see my face and live

There is nothing, absolutely nothing more important to me than the truth. Young earth creationist organizations are among the most dishonest of all organizations—and their severe misrepresentation of what the Bible teaches has resulted in countless millions of people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense. In my Christian apologetics ministry, I have found that the number one reason for people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense is the teaching that the Bible is inerrant in all of its teaching, including the fields of history and science.

I know for certain that the flood described in the book of Genesis did not occur and that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. I also know for certain that Genesis 1:6-8 describes the creation of the earth in a manner that is neither historically nor scientifically accurate. I also know for certain that when Christians deny these incontrovertible objective facts, they subject themselves and their savior to a degree of ridicule that is all too often fatal to the Christian message.

 

[BPPLEE]

There is nothing, absolutely nothing more important to me than the truth. Young earth creationist organizations are among the most dishonest of all organizations—and their severe misrepresentation of what the Bible teaches has resulted in countless millions of people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense. In my Christian apologetics ministry, I have found that the number one reason for people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense is the teaching that the Bible is inerrant in all of its teaching, including the fields of history and science.

I know for certain that the flood described in the book of Genesis did not occur and that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. I also know for certain that Genesis 1:6-8 describes the creation of the earth in a manner that is neither historically nor scientifically accurate. I also know for certain that when Christians deny these incontrovertible objective facts, they subject themselves and their savior to a degree of ridicule that is all too often fatal to the Christian message.

You are too worried about what other people think and you don't know any of those things for certain. They may be true but they are certainly not certain and you didn't bother to answer the question

 

[BPPLEE]

You are too worried about what other people think and you don't know any of those things for certain. They may be true but they are certainly not certain and you didn't bother to answer the question

There is nothing, absolutely nothing more important to me than the truth. Young earth creationist organizations are among the most dishonest of all organizations—and their severe misrepresentation of what the Bible teaches has resulted in countless millions of people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense. In my Christian apologetics ministry, I have found that the number one reason for people regarding the Bible and the Christ that it proclaims as irrelevant nonsense is the teaching that the Bible is inerrant in all of its teaching, including the fields of history and science.

I know for certain that the flood described in the book of Genesis did not occur and that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. I also know for certain that Genesis 1:6-8 describes the creation of the earth in a manner that is neither historically nor scientifically accurate. I also know for certain that when Christians deny these incontrovertible objective facts, they subject themselves and their savior to a degree of ridicule that is all too often fatal to the Christian message.

And just so you know I am not a YEC. I posted a link to one of their articles. If I was worried about what people think I couldn't be a Christian because people think it's ridiculous that Jesus rose from the dead. Maybe you think that didn't happen either because science doesn't support it but I believe it and don't care what anyone thinks about it

 

[GenemZ]

I know for certain that the flood described in the book of Genesis did not occur and that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old.

And...Once again.

It is certain you like to stir up arguments with non substantial empty challenges, to waste time with those who are naïve enough to take the bait.

 

[BPPLEE]

And...Once again.

It is certain you like to stir up arguments with non substantial empty challenges, to waste time with those who are naïve enough to take the bait.

He does not have a monopoly on the truth like he thinks he does. I'm sure one day we'll all find out we were wrong about some things

 

[GenemZ]

He does not have a monopoly on the truth like he thinks he does. I'm sure one day we'll all find out we were wrong about some things

Not thinks. Possibly? Pretends he does....

 

[BPPLEE]

There are many Christians on this forum who believe in evolution that is fine what you believe about creation has nothing to do with salvation. I don't know how God made man I just know he did it. But creationists and evolutionists who believe should both agree that they are both Christians. There is too much of each side trying to ridicule the other. There are theories like the gap theory that allow for an old earth and 6 literal days of creation. There is the day age theory like Hugh Ross teaches with progressive creationism and there is YEC and it would do everyone good to admit they are Christians too

 

[GenemZ]

There are many Christians on this forum who believe in evolution that is fine what you believe about creation has nothing to do with salvation. I don't know how God made man I just know he did it. But creationists and evolutionists who believe should both agree that they are both Christians. There is too much of each side trying to ridicule the other. There are theories like the gap theory that allow for an old earth and 6 literal days of creation. There is the day age theory like Hugh Ross teaches with progressive creationism and there is YEC and it would do everyone good to admit they are Christians too

That's almost funny. Both are Christians. But, one group thinks God sometimes lies.

They are Christians if they believed Jesus died on the Cross for their sins. Yet, some do not believe what it says Jesus did concerning creation. They are still saved. Just double minded believers.

 

[BPPLEE]

That's almost funny. Both are Christians. But, one group thinks God sometimes lies.

They are Christians if they believed Jesus died on the Cross for their sins. Yet, some do not believe what it says Jesus did concerning creation. They are still saved. Just double minded believers.

I don't agree with everyone but I don't judge them. Whether they are

That's almost funny. Both are Christians. But, one group thinks God sometimes lies.

They are Christians if they believed Jesus died on the Cross for their sins. Yet, some do not believe what it says Jesus did concerning creation. They are still saved. Just double minded believers.

I don't agree with everyone but it's not up to me to judge them.

That's almost funny. Both are Christians. But, one group thinks God sometimes lies.

They are Christians if they believed Jesus died on the Cross for their sins. Yet, some do not believe what it says Jesus did concerning creation. They are still saved. Just double minded believers.

You will know them by their fruit other than that it's not up to me to judge

 

[GenemZ]

I don't agree with everyone but I don't judge them. Whether they are

I don't agree with everyone but it's not up to me to judge them.

You will know them by their fruit other than that it's not up to me to judge

Judgement and condemnation are not the same things.. We are not to condemn, but should become mature enough to judge (evaluate correctly). Yet.. we see them both addressed as judgment in the Bible.

For the spiritual man is to judge all things! 1 Corinthians 2:15

 

[BPPLEE]

Judgement and condemnation are not the same things.. We are not to condemn, but should become mature enough to judge (evaluate correctly). Yet.. we see them both addressed as judgment in the Bible.

For the spiritual man is to judge all things! 1 Corinthians 2:15

I agree calling an apple an apple is not judging and those comments were posted by accident. The Bible says you will know them by their fruit

 

[GenemZ]

I agree calling an apple an apple is not judging and those comments were posted by accident. The Bible says you will know them by their fruit

Judgement in that case could be called "discernment."

The apple may look pretty, but discernment will let you know it was covered in pesticide. Rejecting that apple would be the right thing to do.

When Jesus spoke about not judging, he was referring to condemning another with you being judge and jury.

 

[BNR32FAN]

But plants don't need sunlight - they can be grown with artificial light. In both the Big Bang, and the Genesis account, "light" was the first thing that existed. Radiation is light.

So that light surrounded the globe?

 

[BPPLEE]

So that light surrounded the globe?

I have read some teachers who say God provided the light.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I have read some teachers who say God provided the light.

I’m more inclined to believe that when God created things like rocks and the planets that they simply appeared to be older than they actually were. For example if God created a loaf of bread and said that He created it instantaneously, would it appear that it had not been cooked in an oven for 45 minutes? A scientist would examine the bread and come to the conclusion that this bread has been cooked for several minutes because it is not a lump of dough and it has a crust so it couldn’t have been created instantaneously. In this case God had simply condensed the entire process of creating the bread into an instantaneous event and this is what I believe He did with the universe in 6 days. Creation is a miraculous, supernatural event not a natural occurring event or process so trying to explain the scriptures with scientific explanations just doesn’t work because they don’t line up with one another, they’re actually in opposition to one another. I think a lot of Christians get hung up on trying to defend the creation account against atheist skepticism and seek ways to explain how the biblical creation account doesn’t contradict science but it’s a futile effort because there’s still over a hundred other miracles that defy the laws of science that atheists can pluck out of the Bible to use as evidence to refute the validity of the it. Then there are Christians who just can’t seem to accept a supernatural explanation and can’t bring themselves to believe that the miracles mentioned in the Bible actually took place but in my opinion they are inconsistent in their ascertain because somehow they are able to believe that Christ was immaculately conceived and incarnated and they somehow believe in His resurrection even tho all three of these events are in opposition to science. I used to try to defend the integrity of the scriptures by explaining how the biblical creation account could be explained without contradicting science but I’ve come to a realization that it was never intended to be explainable by science. None of God’s miracles are, the whole purpose of them was to show that God could do the impossible.

 

[BPPLEE]

I’m more inclined to believe that when God created things like rocks and the planets that they simply appeared to be older than they actually were. For example if God created a loaf of bread and said that He created it instantaneously, would it appear that it had not been cooked in an oven for 45 minutes? A scientist would examine the bread and come to the conclusion that this bread has been cooked for several minutes because it is not a lump of dough and it has a crust so it couldn’t have been created instantaneously. In this case God had simply condensed the entire process of creating the bread into an instantaneous event and this is what I believe He did with the universe in 6 days. Creation is a miraculous, supernatural event not a natural occurring event or process so trying to explain the scriptures with scientific explanations just doesn’t work because they don’t line up with one another, they’re actually in opposition to one another. I think a lot of Christians get hung up on trying to defend the creation account against atheist skepticism and seek ways to explain how the biblical creation account doesn’t contradict science but it’s a futile effort because there’s still over a hundred other miracles that defy the laws of science that atheists can pluck out of the Bible to use as evidence to refute the validity of the it. Then there are Christians who just can’t seem to accept a supernatural explanation and can’t bring themselves to believe that the miracles mentioned in the Bible actually took place but in my opinion they are inconsistent in their ascertain because somehow they are able to believe that Christ was immaculately conceived and incarnated and they somehow believe in His resurrection even tho all three of these events are in opposition to science. I used to try to defend the integrity of the scriptures by explaining how the biblical creation account could be explained without contradicting science but I’ve come to a realization that it was never intended to be explainable by science. None of God’s miracles are, the whole purpose of them was to show that God could do the impossible.

I have used the same example using the fish and loaves and turning water into wine. They counter that makes God a liar or that your God faked it all up. But God didn't create the earth for the purpose of having dating techniques add up. This is actually called the omphalos theory using the Greek work for a belly button. The argument is that Adam was created a full grown man with a navel

 

[GenemZ]

So that light surrounded the globe?

First four days omnipresent God provided the light.

It says that the sun did not bear light until the fourth day. Gen 1:14-19

So, its possible for the first three days that the light engulfed entire globe for what is called "day."

 

[BNR32FAN]

I have used the same example using the fish and loaves and turning water into wine. They counter that makes God a liar or that your God faked it all up. But God didn't create the earth for the purpose of having dating techniques add up. This is actually called the omphalos theory using the Greek work for a belly button. The argument is that Adam was created a full grown man with a navel

What aspects of the universe would represent the presence of a navel? A navel would have to represent something that wasn’t necessary for the creation process as Adam wouldn’t have needed an navel because he was not born of a woman and therefore was never connected by an umbilical cord. So what do we see in the universe that would represent something that wasn’t necessary for the universe to be created or come into existence?