Progressive's view on creation?

[capnator]

pfft Chinese document 10000 yrs old... science reckons some stuff is millions of years old, but just because some scientists think these things are that old doesnt mean they are, dating methods have been shown to be inaccurate in the past, so saying something is 10000yrs old doesnt mean it is.

 

[Jimlarmore]

I have never had a problem with the earth being here in some lifeless form for billions of years. However, I fully accept the creation account of Genesis 1. When we look out into the universe we can see that the universe is so large that it defies imagination. There are an estimated 10 billion galaxies in the universe but they keep finding more and more of them as they explore deeper into the cosmos. When we look into space we are looking back into the past. The big dipper constalation's light has taken an estimated 75 years to reach us. That means that when you look at this constalation tonite the light you are seeing began it's journey to your eyes 75 years ago. That means it started it's journey way before I was born. Things like black holes and dark matter are subjects of incredible curiosity and wonder. IOW, God has obviously been about creating and maintaining His universe for a long long time. The further we see into the outer reaches of the universe we just see more and more galaxies and stars. There doesn't appear to be an end to it. Maybe the universe is as infinite as it's creator.

On another topic under discussion here of radio dating. Carbon 14 is used to date organic material. Radio isotopes are used to date rocks. Rocks are either igneous or sedimentary. The problem with dating them is that there has to be a lot of assumptions made to accept a certain date as valid. There are too many things that can effect the radiation decay rate in any particular sample. IOW, the only way a sample can be acceptable to make an accurate age determination is to essentially be in a hermetically sealed environment for the eons it was waiting to be dug up and tested. Other radio active elements can defuse within water into and around a rock and change the rate. There are many other things to change it as well.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

You can check out my blog at
http://cafesda.blogspot.com

I have been going over the lesson study guide for this quarter. I found it very interesting that the authors do not understand the seqence of day 4 and assert that we will have to wait till heaven to ask God about it (yet in the same week they said how easily comprehendable the story is). One would assume that when they find that the story does not work as a literal historical events that instead of saying we don't understand it they would say maybe it is not meant as literal historical events. But not yet. The facade is clearly breaking though.

 

[theophile]

PLEASE,please, go to Kent hovind's website, and look at his videos.
He also has debated several evolutionists, and won!!!! Please, they are free.
As Kent SDA--no!!! Creationist, yes!!!!!
If we decide,it took 1000's of years, we deny the 6 day creation, and we can lose the Sabbath meaning.HE IS CREATOR One of the pillars of the faith is that God created in six days, and on the 7th day, He rested.
Evolution makes no sense, (why isn't it occurring now--nothing changes from one KIND to another, although things can vary.)

I would take it to the bank that hovind will turn the heads of many evolutionists out there.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

If we decide,it took 1000's of years, we deny the 6 day creation, and we can lose the Sabbath meaning.HE IS CREATOR One of the pillars of the faith is that God created in six days, and on the 7th day, He rested.

Why would we lose the Sabbath, in the version of the 10 commandments that is recorded to have been written on stone it says nothing about creation. The concept in both Ex. 20 and the following text from Deut is that of rest.

[SIZE=+1] 12 `Observe the sabbath day to keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. 13 `Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant or your ox or your donkey or any of your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you, so that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. 15 `You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to observe the sabbath day. Deut. 5:12-15 NASB [/SIZE]

 

[theophile]

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.



What are you saying?/ It's right there in verse 11.

 

[DrStupid_Ben]

Check out the website of the Geoscience Research Institute which is supported by the SDA General Conference. (A simple google search would find it, sorry I don't have enough posts to provide a link)
It is my understanding that they do not support the young earth creation, but rather an old universe (billions of years) and young life (6000 to 10000 years) on earth, still maintaining 6 literal days of the creation week. This is also supported by a growing number of theologians particularly from the seminary at Andrews University. You will find this view is different to the Creation Science organisations views of a young earth and universe.

I personally lean towards a view of the Genesis accounts of both chapters 1 and 2 from a Poem-Polemic view. This does not dicredit the Sabbath or God's authority as some have said. Genesis was in fact authored for the specific purpose of maintaining a base for such things as the Sabbath and God's authority, only in a way that spoke to the original audience - using a cosmology that is increadibly simillar to those of the Mesopotamian and other near east cultures, only with God stamping his ordered authority on the whole creation.

However, I do not claim to tell other people on this forum what to believe, only what I at this time choose to. This, like many other theological problems would take much more than a forum post to give a full argument.

 

[Sophia7]

Check out the website of the Geoscience Research Institute which is supported by the SDA General Conference. (A simple google search would find it, sorry I don't have enough posts to provide a link)
It is my understanding that they do not support the young earth creation, but rather an old universe (billions of years) and young life (6000 to 10000 years) on earth, still maintaining 6 literal days of the creation week. This is also supported by a growing number of theologians particularly from the seminary at Andrews University. You will find this view is different to the Creation Science organisations views of a young earth and universe.

I personally lean towards a view of the Genesis accounts of both chapters 1 and 2 from a Poem-Polemic view. This does not dicredit the Sabbath or God's authority as some have said. Genesis was in fact authored for the specific purpose of maintaining a base for such things as the Sabbath and God's authority, only in a way that spoke to the original audience - using a cosmology that is increadibly simillar to those of the Mesopotamian and other near east cultures, only with God stamping his ordered authority on the whole creation.

However, I do not claim to tell other people on this forum what to believe, only what I at this time choose to. This, like many other theological problems would take much more than a forum post to give a full argument.

Geoscience Research Institute:
http://www.grisda.org/

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Theophile wrote:

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.



What are you saying?/ It's right there in verse 11.

Yes it is right there in a story written after Israel's Exodus from slavery and after all the laws and instructions were given at Sinai.

So it is not really surprising that the views of the Israelites would be reflected in the story of origins that was written down specifically for them.

Now you may point to the verse you did and say that it is literal history but that really gets you into trouble when you have to describe the other parts of the six days as literal history. For instance what is the "light" on the first day. You can speculate but no answer is really available. The lesson study guide noted that they don't understand why the mention of the creation of the sun moon and stars is relegated to the 4th day. They speculate we will have to wait till heaven to understand why it is there. Why, because if those were not created the very first thing then there would be no such thing as a literal 24 hour day.

The whole thing unravels when it is looked at as literal history. But the concept of taking a day off and resting works no matter what reason you use for it. It is not dependent upon a literal 6 days of creation any more then it is dependent upon us literally being slaves in Egypt, which was actually the case for only one generation of Israelites. The rest had to not take it literally but symbolically because it was their fathers that were slaves not themselves. So they saw the application over the literal.

 

[skurfur]

Kent Hovind has been convicted for tax evasion. He violated construction zoning laws by not paying a $50 fee and spent $40,000 litigating the fee. His masters and doctorate are questionable.

I don't want to be doing a ad hominem fallacy, so listen to his arguments, for sure, but test his arguments thorougly and use basic social physchology when considering his reputation.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Here is a creationist orginization "Answers in Genesis"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/

they have good article to answers questions.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Kent Hovind has been convicted for tax evasion. He violated construction zoning laws by not paying a $50 fee and spent $40,000 litigating the fee. His masters and doctorate are questionable.

I don't want to be doing a ad hominem fallacy, so listen to his arguments, for sure, but test his arguments thorougly and use basic social physchology when considering his reputation.

I have talked to kent hovind personally. I sent him an article just last month and talked to him on the phone. i have been to his siminars and watched at least 75 hours of dvd debats. he reason very well and has much to say. He is very open about his credintals and his troubles. Statment are usually made by his critics and usually exggarated.

Here is his link

www.drdino.com very useful very effective

 

[Sophia7]

The link didn't work. I think it's supposed to be www.drdino.com.

 

[happywiththelord]

I really enjoy listening to Kent Hovind. To bad on his personal issues, but his creation insite to me is right on! There are others as well. I used to watch a television show on television, it was on satellite, from the Creation Network. Good stuff! There were several creationists on there talking. They made it so clear. Another one is David Hamm? Let me look up the name. I think it was that though.

 

[happywiththelord]

Just looked it up, his name is Ken Hamm. He has good stuff to on creation vs. evolution.

 

[Jimlarmore]

I'm not a progressive Adventist the way I see it but I believe that there could have been something here floating around before the Lord created life on it. The word abysmos used in the hebrew could be interpreted that way. Then again, it could be interpeted as nothing as well.

Examining the evidence as it is presented to us makes us wonder about the entire universe being created in 6 days or all of the galaxies etc on one day. By the reckoning we have today the light that many of these celestrial bodies emit has been traveling thru space for billions of years. So it appears God has been about creating for a long long time and I don't really see Him stopping after this sin problem is resolved. The universe is by all measures infinite as is it's creator. Why would He stop creating new life now especially after the sin problem is resolved?

I have a lot of questions lined up to be answered once we are united with our Creator.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[keyarch]

I am non-denominational, but most of my family are SDA and I went there as a kid, so consider this a fellowship post.
It is very refreshing to see several in this thread that are not afraid to interpret scriptures for what they say.
I've tried to do extensive study on this foundational issue, and I have come to the following conclusion of what scripture is saying:

1. Genesis 1:1-2 is talking about THE heaven (universe) and THE earth (planet covered in water). These things are of an unknowable age.
2. The "Creation Week" starts with God's light in Gen. 1:3 and proceeds for a total of six 24 hour days. During this time, the earth is molded to provide land masses above the water, the atmosphere was established, the sun and moon "set" into place and all the biology was created. By genealogy, we can establish this event to about 6,120 years ago.
3. The YEC group will point to Gen. 1:16 as when the stars were created, but most English translations have added words here. God made the lesser light (moon) to rule the night, with stars.
4. The YEC group will quote Exodus 20:11 as saying everything in the whole universe was created 6,000 years ago. Words have been added here too. It actually says "For six days the LORD made (fashioned, worked on)" the things in Genesis 1. All in reference to a work week and not in any way to add another narrative to the creation event. The text does NOT say "For in six days".

This creation model could have other names, but I call it 'YBC' for Young Biological Creation. A full narrative is at:
http://www.genesistruth.org/Genesisday1_4.htm

 

[ChristianCandy]

One thing that points to an old earth is the different species of humans buried in the earth which are not Homo Sapiens, like Adam & Eve.

There are the Neanderthals, Homo Erectus, Homo Florens, & others to mention a few. Most of these species of humans are millions/billions old (older than Adam & Eve by far).

I think God has been creating humans on the earth for a long time, long before Adam & Eve were created. Because God cast Satan out of the heavens, Satan has been ruining this earth & possibly solar system & universe time & time again since God first originally created it.

Gen. 1:1 tells us of the first time God created the earth.
Gen. 1:2 tells us of God re-creating the earth & stars & solar system.

There is a story God didn't tell us about between Gen 1:1 & Gen 1:2. God is a Perfect Being. He would not have created a void & lifeless planet like we see in Gen. 1:2. Only Satan is capable of destruction. However, the earth is in a destructive state in Gen. 1:2.

Something happened between Gen 1:1 & Gen 1:2 that is not relative to our beginnings with Adam & Eve, so God does not include those other accounts to our beginning.

But those other species of human bones unearthed from our planet does tell us we are not the only humans God created on this planet.

Does anybody have any thoughts on those other species of humans which are not Homo Sapiens like we are but came from our same planet & are millions/billions years old?

 

[Jimlarmore]

Many of the so called hominids your are talking about here are actually juvenile apes not primitive ancestors to us homo sapiens. In nearly all the cases they only have small parts of skulls or leg bones and from that they build an entire skeleton. It's like trying to build a corvette by finding a tail light and a right fender. The sacrum of many of these ( very rare to find these ) indicate a quadrapedal not bipedal way of locomotion. There has to be many many assumptions made on these so-called primitive man models. A tooth found in Nebraska caused a whole primitive man to be built with pictures and everything. They called him the "Nebraska Man". This was even used at the Scopesfield trial that got evolution taught in our public schools. Later they found the source of this tooth and it turned out to be pecary or a pig.

The problem is that in science the accomplishments have been so great we take everything they say as gospel and true. However, in the case of anthopology they make too many assumptions and assign to fossilized finds things that may not be. Not too many years ago they found a Neanderthal skeleton in a cave in Europe with a coat of chain male armour on. Neanderthals were supposed to exist long before chain male amour was around. There's good evidence that this may have been a genetic condition that existed in ancient times that got passed on until it died out.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Adventist Dissident]

I have yet to see some one offer this explanation.

the universe is billions of years old and this planet and planetary system are young.

As far as the earth being created to look old I have to disagree. evolutionist claim the earth is billions of years old and the granites are proof of that. granites they claim took billions of years to cool off. ,but dr Robert Gentry has conducted a survey of the granites. he has found that polonium radio halo are present in the granites. a certain type of radio halo found , can only last a short period then disappears. these halos are found frozen in the granites. This would be like alkaseltzer bubbles being found frozen in a glass of water. the only way that could happen is if it was an rapid freeze. the same way it is with the Granites. The existence of the radio halos is evidence that the granites are not billions of years old