Questions about creation, how long the Earth has been around, and the universe

[Spike2k]

All right, i don't know where to start. First, this is my first post/thread on this forum, don't flame .

I went to christian/catholic schools until 8th grade (that was my last year there)
It was almost impossible to question the teachers there. They would not listen, and if you argued, you would have to go to the office.
My argument starts here. Creation took place in 6 days, with 1 day to rest. Science tells us that Earth has been around for a few billion years. This right here starts the arguments.
I BELIEVE that creation may have taken "6 days" but not in the sense that it took 6 days. I believe that the first few days were 800 million years old. Once the fish and reptiles started showing up, i believe the days were down to 100 million years, and then once the humans started appearing, i believe they were only a few million years old. My theory works, because according to science, the world is old, and evolution took place. Now before you jump on my case about evolution, who is to say it didn't happen. All our scientific theories point to evolution. If my theory was right, meaning that the days weren't days, then once again, I'm right. If God started evolution, then the bible is right and science is right once again. Just because God may not have made Mankind in ONE day, doesn't mean he didn't make us. He could have put all the elements in the right place at the right time and started the process. Therefore we = made in God's image. Adam and Eve could possibly just be a symbol of humanity. They may have been the original 2, but all of their kin had to populate the planet, which would not have been explained in the bible it would have taken millions of pages. This would take much time to just happen in 1 or 2 days.

so i guess what i'm asking is, is how is the Bible right? What evidence that points towards the BIBLE being right and not science?

That's all i have for now on this subject, but i am full of arguments when it comes to the bible. I am a christian and i do attend church every week, but i am trying to fulfill my faith by figuring all this out.


*lost christian*

 

[GREG]

so are you asking if the days where all in a row

 

[LightBearer]

The Bible doesn't actually state the age of the earth it simply states that "In the beggining God created the heavens and the earth" Gen 1:1

This allows for the earth to be as old as the most recent claim that I have seen of around 4.5 billion years.

In verse two it then takes up a point further on in time and goes on to describe how God prepared the earth for Man's habitation. These creative days were each many thousands of years long.

 

[purepremiumpulp]

Just because science tells you that the earth is billions of years old, don’t accept it so quickly. True science involves the scientific method as its primary study tool. If scientists cannot observe, repeat, observe, repeat, etc. the same creation "experiment" then they have no reason to make a conclusion. This is where true science crosses over into philosophy, speculation, and religion. If you are a believer of the Bible, then you should take it literally, unless it is otherwise suggested to be a parable or symbolism. "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day." It is obvious that the author didn't intend to confuse the reader, but instead clearly stated each of the days consist of an evening and a morning, just as they do now. If you accept it literally, one day isn't an arbitrary value of time.

Evolution -- I know I'm going to get flamed for this one but here it goes.... Death did not enter into the world until the fall of mankind. How then can evolution and the Bible agree with each other? They are mutually exclusive, if one is right, the other must be wrong. Defenders of evolution will bring up the geologic column where you have the ascending structure of organisms throughout history with humans at the top of the list. This however has never been found anywhere in nature in the fossil records, and is only a pictorial representation of what man already believed, not what was found by scientific research. The geologic column falls apart when confronted with reason and logic. It estimates some 90,000 feet of thickness for the entire sedimentary rock column. The greatest depth man has ever drilled is only 22,000 feet, some 25% of the estimated rock layer.
Another aspect to think about... The second law of thermodynamics refutes the idea of evolution. During each energy exchange there is always a portion of the total energy that is lost to a non-reusable form of energy. This means that there is a pattern of DECAY as time passes. Evolution states that things became more complex and organized as time passed, when actually, things should have broken down and become less organized throughout the “billions of years” that claimed to have passed.

Spike2k, keep up the faith, don’t allow science to steer you away from the One who called you. Grow in the grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and press on towards the high mark.

 

[Arikay]

Yes I do have a feeling that will get ripped apart, as I see a certain scientist Christian that would disagree.

So I will just say,
•You do not need to believe in a literal bible, to be a christian.

•The geological column does exist. One spot is in north dakota, and has been found in at least 25 different places.
I would recomend double checking your source of your information.

 

[lucaspa]

All right, i don't know where to start. First, this is my first post/thread on this forum, don't flame

That's all i have for now on this subject, but i am full of arguments when it comes to the bible. I am a christian and i do attend church every week, but i am trying to fulfill my faith by figuring all this out.
*lost christian*

Read the two quotes in my signature. That's how you figure it out.
.

Creation took place in 6 days, with 1 day to rest.

Not according to Genesis 2:4b. Creation took place within a single day there. You've got two contradictory creation stories in Genesis 1-3. That shows that neither one is literal.

Science tells us that Earth has been around for a few billion years. This right here starts the arguments.
I BELIEVE that creation may have taken "6 days" but not in the sense that it took 6 days. I believe that the first few days were 800 million years old.

This is the "Day-Age Theory" of Old Earth Creationism. One problem is that, if you use this, then plants are trying to exist 800 million years without a sun. Not only that, but you have whales existing before land mammals. Since whales evolved from land mammals, this isn't possible.

What evidence that points towards the BIBLE being right and not science?

It's not the "BIBLE", but a particular interpretation of the Bible that is claimed to be right. And then that interpretation is claimed to be "the Bible" as tho no other interpretation is possible. Always keep separate what is "the Bible" and what is interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Chobo Char]

Just because science tells you that the earth is billions of years old, don’t accept it so quickly. True science involves the scientific method as its primary study tool. If scientists cannot observe, repeat, observe, repeat, etc. the same creation "experiment" then they have no reason to make a conclusion. This is where true science crosses over into philosophy, speculation, and religion. If you are a believer of the Bible, then you should take it literally, unless it is otherwise suggested to be a parable or symbolism. "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day." It is obvious that the author didn't intend to confuse the reader, but instead clearly stated each of the days consist of an evening and a morning, just as they do now. If you accept it literally, one day isn't an arbitrary value of time.

But ALL of our observations tell us that the earth really is billions of years old. Maybe you would like to present some evidence that would suggest otherwise? Sorry but a literal interpretation of genesis has been refuted time and time again by just about every area of the natural sciences.

Evolution -- I know I'm going to get flamed for this one but here it goes.... Death did not enter into the world until the fall of mankind. How then can evolution and the Bible agree with each other? They are mutually exclusive, if one is right, the other must be wrong. Defenders of evolution will bring up the geologic column where you have the ascending structure of organisms throughout history with humans at the top of the list. This however has never been found anywhere in nature in the fossil records, and is only a pictorial representation of what man already believed, not what was found by scientific research. The geologic column falls apart when confronted with reason and logic. It estimates some 90,000 feet of thickness for the entire sedimentary rock column. The greatest depth man has ever drilled is only 22,000 feet, some 25% of the estimated rock layer.

Hah, creationists are trying to say that adding the thickest sediments in each period from anywhere in the world defines the entire geologic column. This is simply false. There are over 25 basins around the world in which even an oil well can drill through the entire geologic column, in all of which we find fossilized remains of plants and animals in the order that they existed during the earth's lifetime. Your asserion that there is no geological evidence to support evolution is false.

Another aspect to think about... The second law of thermodynamics refutes the idea of evolution. During each energy exchange there is always a portion of the total energy that is lost to a non-reusable form of energy. This means that there is a pattern of DECAY as time passes. Evolution states that things became more complex and organized as time passed, when actually, things should have broken down and become less organized throughout the “billions of years” that claimed to have passed.

Evolution says no such thing. And you do know that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics only applies to closed systems don't you? Biological systems like the earth are open since we have radiation from the sun which is pretty much the source of life. Also you can increase order in one area of a system at the expense of increased entropy in other areas.

Spike2k, keep up the faith, don’t allow science to steer you away from the One who called you. Grow in the grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and press on towards the high mark.

How much faith can you have if the only way you'll believe is if the earth was created in 6 days 6,000 years ago?

 

[purepremiumpulp]

Yes I do have a feeling that will get ripped apart, as I see a certain scientist Christian that would disagree.

So I will just say,
•You do not need to believe in a literal bible, to be a christian.

•The geological column does exist. One spot is in north dakota, and has been found in at least 25 different places.
I would recomend double checking your source of your information.

The geologic column that you say exists over different parts of the world has only a 1-mile depth average. The complete column you find in a text book that is supposed to cover all geologic history is much, much deeper than this. So the complete geologic column is mere speculation, it has never been found in totality. And if this really was true and not just coincidences, wouldn't there be more than 25 places around the world? wouldn't it be everywhere? instead of about 1% of the earth's surface?

 

[Bushido216]

Unfortunately, plate tectonics to pretty nasty things to the perfect lineup of geological layers.

 

[Jet Black]

The geologic column that you say exists over different parts of the world has only a 1-mile depth average. The complete column you find in a text book that is supposed to cover all geologic history is much, much deeper than this. So the complete geologic column is mere speculation, it has never been found in totality. And if this really was true and not just coincidences, wouldn't there be more than 25 places around the world? wouldn't it be everywhere? instead of about 1% of the earth's surface?

err no. like, erosion and stuff. and if there was a flood, the column woundn't be found anywhere

 

[lucaspa]

Just because science tells you that the earth is billions of years old, don’t accept it so quickly. True science involves the scientific method as its primary study tool. If scientists cannot observe, repeat, observe, repeat, etc. the same creation "experiment" then they have no reason to make a conclusion.

Sorry, but that's not "true science". As long as the data is available today for anyone to study and look at it, then it is science.

Besides, you just declared that all the work of creation scientists on the Flood can't be done! After all, Flood geologists like Henry Morris or Steve Austin can't repeat the Flood, can they? Yet they have no problem reaching conclusions about the Flood. Sauce for the goose.

Evolution -- I know I'm going to get flamed for this one but here it goes.... Death did not enter into the world until the fall of mankind. How then can evolution and the Bible agree with each other? They are mutually exclusive, if one is right, the other must be wrong.

Your theology and evolution are mutually exclusive, but your theology is not the Bible. The Bible isn't referring to physical death. See Genesis 2:18. If it was physical death that entered the world, then Adam and Eve should have dropped dead the moment they ate the fruit. Instead, in Genesis 3:22 we have them kicked out of the Garden before they can eat of the Tree of Life and live forever. If they weren't going to die, they wouldn't need to eat of the tree.

Defenders of evolution will bring up the geologic column where you have the ascending structure of organisms throughout history with humans at the top of the list. This however has never been found anywhere in nature in the fossil records, and is only a pictorial representation of what man already believed, not what was found by scientific research.

What has been found, although not all of it has been found in one place. But even that I'm not sure of. I think in some places the column is intact.

Anyway, since the various strata in different locations overlap, you can put them together that way. It's like tearing up two copies of the Bible and then putting one complete copy together out of the pieces. You can overlap words and sentences to get a complete text.

The second law of thermodynamics refutes the idea of evolution. During each energy exchange there is always a portion of the total energy that is lost to a non-reusable form of energy. This means that there is a pattern of DECAY as time passes. Evolution states that things became more complex and organized as time passed, when actually, things should have broken down and become less organized throughout the “billions of years” that claimed to have passed.

Never heard of Gibb's free energy, have you? This is a misstatement of SLOT, BTW. The entropy of the system and surroundings increases, but the entropy of the system can decrease as long as the surroundings have a larger increase in entropy. And guess what, the entropy of the entire universe is increasing. But while that happens you can have local decreases in entropy.

Guys, this argument was refuted over 30 years ago, right after it was brought up the first time. You have to pay attention and not repeat arguments that have already been shown to be false. If you keep doing that, it is false witness.

 

[lucaspa]

And if this really was true and not just coincidences, wouldn't there be more than 25 places around the world? wouldn't it be everywhere? instead of about 1% of the earth's surface?

You've got to test your claims before you post them. Think about this a bit. When previous parts of the geologic column are exposed, as they are in the Rockies and anywhere there is sedimentary rock, what happens? Erosion. So parts in any one place go missing as they are eroded.

Also, since the geological column is the laying down of sediments, those sediments have to come from somewhere else, right? Again, erosion. So, at any given time, only part of the surface is actually laying down the geologic column. The rest of the surface is providing the sediments by erosion. Now, over 4.5 billion years, just how much of the planet is always going to have sediments deposited and never be at the surface to undergo erosion? I'd say 1% is a large area.

 

[Arikay]

Not to mention that they only find a column when they dig for it, and the digging is not cheap.

However, even the finding of One Single place that has the entire column, is enough to falsify your claim that it exists only in text books.

 

[purepremiumpulp]

But ALL of our observations tell us that the earth really is billions of years old. Maybe you would like to present some evidence that would suggest otherwise?

How much faith can you have if the only way you'll believe is if the earth was created in 6 days 6,000 years ago?

I am sure you have already heard of every point I could make to defend my position. I'm not into fighting on the internet when I know neither side will change their views. I think by the definition of the word I have faith because I believe in the things I have not seen. Just because your faith might seem more scientifically correct doesn't really mean anything to me. Believe what you want to believe, but if you are going to have faith in Christ, why not do it whole-heartedly? I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

Blepo! Blepo! Blepo!

 

[Arikay]

Because I doubt having faith in christ = must believe in lies and false information.
However, Im sure many anti christians would be very happy if it did.

I am sure you have already heard of every point I could make to defend my position. I'm not into fighting on the internet when I know neither side will change their views. I think by the definition of the word I have faith because I believe in the things I have not seen. Just because your faith might seem more scientifically correct doesn't really mean anything to me. Believe what you want to believe, but if you are going to have faith in Christ, why not do it whole-heartedly? I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

Blepo! Blepo! Blepo!

 

[Bushido216]

I am sure you have already heard of every point I could make to defend my position. I'm not into fighting on the internet when I know neither side will change their views. I think by the definition of the word I have faith because I believe in the things I have not seen. Just because your faith might seem more scientifically correct doesn't really mean anything to me. Believe what you want to believe, but if you are going to have faith in Christ, why not do it whole-heartedly? I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

Blepo! Blepo! Blepo!

That's called blind faith.

 

[Phred]

I am sure you have already heard of every point I could make to defend my position.

Try me, you might be surprised.

I think by the definition of the word I have faith because I believe in the things I have not seen.

So that makes it right to immediately disbelieve anything that contradicts your faith? What you've just said is that you believe it because you believe it, no matter what. At least, unlike most creationists, you aren't trying to couch that as scientific.

Just because your faith might seem more scientifically correct doesn't really mean anything to me.

It doesn't seem so, it IS. So if facts and figures, evidence and proof mean nothing to you... Why should I grant any validity to your assertions?

Believe what you want to believe, but if you are going to have faith in Christ, why not do it whole-heartedly? I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

Why not indeed? And there are those who will point out to you that if science simply observes and tries to explain the world AS GOD MADE IT. Who are we to question God's creation?

 

[lucaspa]

I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

What do you do with Luke 2:1? Do you think it is absolute, literal truth that the entire world was enrolled?

How about Job 26:7, I Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and Psalm 104:5? They say the earth is immovable. Do you think that is absolute truth and the earth does not move?

We are not talking Christianity vs evolution. We are talking fanatic Biblical literalism, not Christianity.

 

[LorentzHA]

Believe what you want to believe, but if you are going to have faith in Christ, why not do it whole-heartedly? I believe everything He says is absolute truth and I dont try to pick it apart in the light of modern skeptics.

The Bible (NT) was written loooooong after the time of Christ. Where in the Bible does Jesus say our planet is young? I must have missed that the first 2 times through....? Young on what timesacle, eternity?
BTW-How does a young Earth help your case that there is a God or Heaven since, religion claims God is eteranal and that He always has been and always will be? Please let me know about this.

 

[lucaspa]

I believe everything He says is absolute truth

Try Ezekiel 20:25. Of course, there is also that troubling saying by Jesus that "this generation" shall not pass before the Kingdom of God shows up. If you are going to hold to this, forget modern science, you've got enough troubles internally to keep you busy for a long time.