Young earth creationism & 40000 year old frozen wolf

[kiwimac]

Apart from Genesis 1-2, none of those are creation "stories", ie narrative accounts. Most are verses of poetry with brief figurative references to certain aspects of creation, others are not refering to creation at all. Only Genesis 1-2 give us the full creation account in the genre of historical narrative. ie. presented as plain fact.

The fact that many other scriptures refer to this creation account as historic fact proves it is true and not a fictional story. Eg. The institution of the Sabbath (Ex 20:11, Ex 31:16-17, Gen 2:3), the genealogies of Jesus, Paul's explanation of how sin entered the world (Ron 5:12, 1 Cor 15:21-22) a key aspect of the Gospel, the institution of marriage (Matthew 19:3-9), the role of women in 1 Tim 2:12-14, etc, etc.

The non-literal interpretation of Gen 1-2 has only been around for the last century or two, since Christians have tried to reconcile Genesis with the theories of modern-day secular science. It is an example of eisogesis - the fallacy of starting with a preconceived idea and inventing a novel interpretation of a text to try and make it fit the idea. It is the opposite of exegesis - starting with the text and letting the words speak for themself, applying the established principles of hermeneutics.

This need to treat Genesis 1 and 2 as scientific proof of creation when they are nothing of the kind is at the heart of the attitude of some Christians towards science & scientific methods. It is foolishness and makes Christianity extremely unattractive to those people who are scientifically minded and educated.

 

[mcarans]

Nice that they didn't decide to destroy it as other museums are rumored to have done with the skeletons of giants!

The Smithsonian: We Destroyed the Skeletons of Giant Humans


and.......


NDE of Dr. Richard Eby verifies old earth and gap theory.

The first link lead to this:
Smithsonian Admits to Destruction of Thousands of Giant Human Skeletons in Early 1900's
where it says "Unlike most fake news stories, this giant skeleton claim is an extant long-running rumor that refuses to stay dead rather than a recently invented falsehood. National Geographic has been battling the hoax since at least 2002"

 

[coffee4u]

This need to treat Genesis 1 and 2 as scientific proof of creation when they are nothing of the kind is at the heart of the attitude of some Christians towards science & scientific methods. It is foolishness and makes Christianity extremely unattractive to those people who are scientifically minded and educated.

Genesis is Gods revealed word. Nowhere does it claim to be a science book, nor does it need or want to be. Science is man's attempt to understand the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. That only applies to the here and now and the physical. You can't disprove God or prove God the same way you can't test miracles or the world that God created because it isn't here to test.

I'm sure it's not attractive and God didn't intend it to be.
1 Corinthians 3:18-23
18 Don’t fool yourselves! If any of you think you are wise in the things of this world, you will have to become foolish before you can be truly wise.

 

[mcarans]

Genesis is Gods revealed word. Nowhere does it claim to be a science book, nor does it need or want to be. Science is man's attempt to understand the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. That only applies to the here and now and the physical. You can't disprove God or prove God the same way you can't test miracles or the world that God created because it isn't here to test.

I'm sure it's not attractive and God didn't intend it to be.
1 Corinthians 3:18-23
18 Don’t fool yourselves! If any of you think you are wise in the things of this world, you will have to become foolish before you can be truly wise.

You can use observation of the physical and natural world now to find out about the past or do you discount all historical and archaeological evidence and believe that the Bible is our only source of information about history?

You are not taking 1 Corinthians 3 literally - it is a letter to the Corinthians about divisions in the Corinthian church.
"4 For when one says, “I belong to Paul,” and another, “I belong to Apollos,” are you not merely human?...21 So let no one boast about human leaders. For all things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas"

The Corinthians are lining up behind different human church leaders and Paul is gently rebuking them for it. If you want to try to take this non literally and apply it to modern times, it has to be taken wildly out of context to apply it to historical study. More in context would be to see it as speaking against the habit of Christian churches to keep dividing into more and more denominations over doctrinal differences.

 

[steve78]

What would make God a liar is Him "creating" all land animals over a period of millions of years via evolution and then saying, "I made all this in one day".

Are you happy to worship a liar?

That's exactly what he did though.

And god is not a liar, the problem is young earther's misunderstanding of scripture. God says he made the earth in 7 days. The bible does not state how long each day is. The days may have been millions of years in length, science backs this up and the events of the sixth day were of a greater period than 24 hours.

Young earth creation is utter nonsense.

 

[steve78]

It doesn't read metaphorical. It reads a factual account.

Was Adam metaphorical?

It's not factual. None of us would understand a factual account. The thing about Genesis it's simple and even a young kid can understand it.

It's the understanding that's important not how it was done.

 

[steve78]

It's a true story.

It's not. Sometimes i think Christianity is just for stupid thick people.

Why oh why do some believe words written in a book two thousand years ago that cannot be verified as to weather they are true as nobody was alive at the time to witness the events as written and continue to ignore smart intelligent people who can do the science to prove beyond doubt that the earth is billions of years old.

 

[coffee4u]

That's exactly what he did though.

And god is not a liar, the problem is young earther's misunderstanding of scripture. God says he made the earth in 7 days. The bible does not state how long each day is. The days may have been millions of years in length, science backs this up and the events of the sixth day were of a greater period than 24 hours.

Young earth creation is utter nonsense.

And since Adam was made on day six how do you reconcile that with the verse a few chapters later that says he died 930 years after he was created?

 

[mcarans]

And since Adam was made on day six how do you reconcile that with the verse a few chapters later that says he died 930 years after he was created?

This Wikipedia article might help you with that one:
Longevity myths - Wikipedia
"Some apologists explain these extreme ages as ancient mistranslations that converted the word "month" to "year", mistaking lunar cycles for solar ones: this would turn an age of 969 years into a more reasonable 969 lunar months, or about 78.3 solar years...
Nineteenth-century critic Vincent Goehlert suggests the lifetimes "represented epochs merely, to which were given the names of the personages especially prominent in such epochs, who, in consequence of their comparatively long lives, were able to acquire an exalted influence.""

Another interesting thing in that article is how widespread longevity myths were among the many different civilisations and religions of the past. Jainism wins the numbers battle with this outrageous claim:
"Shantinatha was said to have lived even for over 800,000 years before his ascension"

 

[JAL]

And since Adam was made on day six how do you reconcile that with the verse a few chapters later that says he died 930 years after he was created?

Not sure what your objection is here. Why is that a problem? Sounds like you are presuming the days to be of equal duration? The text doesn't necessitate that stipulation. Here's my reading:

In Genesis 1, God defined a day as a period of darkness followed by a period of light (the number of hours isn't specified, nor are we promised equal duration). So where did the light come from? Not the sun, because it wasn't set in place until the 4th Day. All bibles and commentators refer 2Cor 4:4-6 back to Genesis 1. Therefore it was the (physical!) Light from Christ's face. Thus God shined His own face into the galaxy, and quenched it, six times, over 4 billion years, as to lay down His own six-day workweek as a model for us to follow, with rest on the seventh Daylight. His Light is still shining (it illuminates the heavenly city for example) and thus the 7th Galactic Daylight is still shining (it's eternal).

Over that 4 billion years, His Light also provided local 24 hour daylights to the earth (i.e. days and nights), including photosynthesis to the plants, until our sun was set in place on the 4th Galactic Day.

BTW I'm an OEC.

 

[Jipsah]

"Shantinatha was said to have lived even for over 800,000 years before his ascension"

I bet he was really crabby.

 

[coffee4u]

This Wikipedia article might help you with that one:
Longevity myths - Wikipedia
"Some apologists explain these extreme ages as ancient mistranslations that converted the word "month" to "year", mistaking lunar cycles for solar ones: this would turn an age of 969 years into a more reasonable 969 lunar months, or about 78.3 solar years...
Nineteenth-century critic Vincent Goehlert suggests the lifetimes "represented epochs merely, to which were given the names of the personages especially prominent in such epochs, who, in consequence of their comparatively long lives, were able to acquire an exalted influence.""

Another interesting thing in that article is how widespread longevity myths were among the many different civilisations and religions of the past. Jainism wins the numbers battle with this outrageous claim:
"Shantinatha was said to have lived even for over 800,000 years before his ascension"

The reason for worldwide 'myths' of creation, long-lived ages, and a huge flood is because they were real events and people took the knowledge with them and retold it by mouth. Of course, the stories changed over time and became embellished to suit the culture retelling it, but they are there across cultures because they all at one point had a shared common experience.

 

[mcarans]

The reason for worldwide 'myths' of creation, long-lived ages, and a huge flood is because they were real events and people took the knowledge with them and retold it by mouth. Of course, the stories changed over time and became embellished to suit the culture retelling it, but they are there across cultures because they all at one point had a shared common experience.

If that were true, all the other cultures would start their creation with the flood as according to the Bible only Noah and his family survived - whatever other cultures there were died off with the flood. However they don't. For example in Daoist creation myth, "The Way gave birth to unity; unity gave birth to duality; duality gave birth to trinity; trinity gave birth to the myriad creatures." (Daodejing, 4th century BCE).

 

[coffee4u]

The flood came 600 odd years after creation so I am not sure what you mean by

would start their creation with the flood

All people alive today are descendants of Noah and his family.

 

[kiwimac]

The flood came 600 odd years after creation so I am not sure what you mean by

All people alive today are descendants of Noah and his family.

No, no they are not.

 

[coffee4u]

No, no they are not.

Anything to back up that assertion?

My assertion is the Bible.
Genesis 7
13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark.

23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives. 19 All the animals and all the creatures that move along the ground and all the birds—everything that moves on land—came out of the ark, one kind after another.

Genesis 9
18 The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These were the three sons of Noah, and from them came the people who were scattered over the whole earth.

 

[Miles]

I just want to say that's very cool discovery. No pun intended.

 

[kiwimac]

Anything to back up that assertion?

My assertion is the Bible.
Genesis 7
13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark.

23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives. 19 All the animals and all the creatures that move along the ground and all the birds—everything that moves on land—came out of the ark, one kind after another.

Genesis 9
18 The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These were the three sons of Noah, and from them came the people who were scattered over the whole earth.

The provable, continuing existence of cultures which happily survived right through the period.

 

[coffee4u]

The provable, continuing existence of cultures which happily survived right through the period.

Not according to the Bible
Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out.
Only Noah and his family survived so there were no cultures which happily survived as the water rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits above the highest point (approximately 22 feet or 7 meters) Genesis7:20
Not unless they were a family of mermaids.

 

[mcarans]

Not according to the Bible
Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out.
Only Noah and his family survived so there were no cultures which happily survived as the water rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits above the highest point (approximately 22 feet or 7 meters) Genesis7:20
Not unless they were a family of mermaids.

Genesis also talks about a flat earth. Is that something you believe in?