• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Young-Earth Creationism

LouisBooth

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2002
8,895
64
✟19,588.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"Even though the two are not particularly connected or there is any logical reason for making the link, you do so. "

they are quite linked. They both were created, and both were cursed at the same time. Just read genesis, its quite fully of parallels.

"Which is why I hope you will admit the error and retract the careless statement that was probably hastily made without sufficient thought."

its not an error at all. I haven't seen any evidience that shows me the earth wasn't created mature.

"Sort of a kick in the teeth to learn that devoted Young Earth Creationists"

Again, this doesn't support your claim. I don't see anything about them being the 1st geologists ever, nor anything about them being christian, so try again mor.

"virtually every European was (you guessed it) Christian"

Doubtful. That's to claim that just because you're born you're automatically a christian, what baloney.

Like I have said before, in time you will find out. I'm willing to wait. :)

"You claim all this data exists, yet it is insufficient to convince anyone. "

1. I didn't claim anything. I said both sides have compelling evidience and I see the bigger holes on the other side.
 
Upvote 0

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Sinai:"Even though the two are not particularly connected or there is any logical reason for making the link, you do so. "

LouisBooth:"they are quite linked. They both were created, and both were cursed at the same time. Just read genesis, its quite fully of parallels.

I have read Genesis--many times. I have also looked to ancient Jewish commentaries on the passages in question, and have studied the Hebrew words and their meanings. And at no point have I found any scripture that requires a 6000-year old universe. Indeed, a close examination of the scriptures argues against such a conclusion. Furthermore, I have not found any credible evidence in science that supports a 6000-year old universe. If you have found such evidence, please present it. Thank you.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
49
Visit site
✟20,190.00
Faith
Atheist
Again, this doesn't support your claim. I don't see anything about them being the 1st geologists ever, nor anything about them being christian, so try again mor.

  *snort*. Pick me a geologist of any note between 1600 and 1800 who wasn't Christian. Yet somehow the Deluge was dropped in there, wasn't it?

Doubtful. That's to claim that just because you're born you're automatically a christian, what baloney

  Last refuge of the desperate: *whine* "They weren't true Christians".

1. I didn't claim anything. I said both sides have compelling evidience and I see the bigger holes on the other side.

  Let me refersh your memory, Louis. You stated on post 29 "the bulk? Doubtful. ".

   Which is a claim that data exists contrary to established geology. Yet you have been unable to present any. How strange.

 
 
Upvote 0

Pete Harcoff

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce
Jun 30, 2002
8,304
72
✟9,884.00
Faith
Other Religion
Originally posted by Live!
Why would God create the earth "mature"? I don't think God decieves people.

Because that's the only way to reconcile all the evidence that points to a 4.5 billion year old Earth (and a 15+ billion year old universe), yet still claim it's only 6000 years old. It's a very weak argument, at best.
 
Upvote 0

LouisBooth

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2002
8,895
64
✟19,588.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"Indeed, a close examination of the scriptures argues against such a conclusion"

That's YOUR OPINION, and one I would disagree with having done the same research.

"Pick me a geologist of any note between 1600 and 1800 who wasn't Christian. "

*chuckles* I can say, "I'm a duck" would you believe me? Same logic applies.

"Last refuge of the desperate: "

Yup, it sure is the refuge of the desperate ya know what they say? "your point is the last refuge of the desperate" thinking..wow, I can't refute that at all so I'll just make some sort of I'm taking my toys home because I don't like your points crack.
 
Upvote 0

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Sinai:"Even though the two are not particularly connected or there is any logical reason for making the link, you do so. "

LouisBooth:"they are quite linked. They both were created, and both were cursed at the same time. Just read genesis, its quite fully of parallels."

Sinai: "I have read Genesis--many times. I have also looked to ancient Jewish commentaries on the passages in question, and have studied the Hebrew words and their meanings. And at no point have I found any scripture that requires a 6000-year old universe. Indeed, a close examination of the scriptures argues against such a conclusion. Furthermore, I have not found any credible evidence in science that supports a 6000-year old universe. If you have found such evidence, please present it. Thank you."

LouisBooth: "That's YOUR OPINION, and one I would disagree with having done the same research."

Louis, you claimed that it is "doubtful" that the bulk of scientific evidence supports the position that the universe is older than 6000 years. I have asked you if you had any credible evidence in science that supports a 6000-year old universe to "please present it."

Since you have ignored my request, does that mean that you have NO such evidence?
 
Upvote 0

Smilin

Spirit of the Wolf
Jun 18, 2002
5,650
244
59
Appalachia, The Trail of Tears
Visit site
✟30,906.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by Chris H
Actually, I would welcome a few good YEC's here to debate and argue against a few of us who believe in evolution.

As far as how these things formed, I think the real trick is to

1. Read all of the young earth creation literature available...

2. Look at the actual scientific claims made by the young earthers...

3. Examine exactly why mainline science rejects those answers...

4. Determine if mainline science is a legitimate explanation...

Having done this myself, I prayerfully disagree with our moderater. This is why I now believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth and in evolution.

In Christ

Chris

 

Chris:

Glad to meet another Christian who can think, observe, and draw conclusions independently.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
49
Visit site
✟20,190.00
Faith
Atheist
Yup, it sure is the refuge of the desperate ya know what they say? "your point is the last refuge of the desperate" thinking..wow, I can't refute that at all so I'll just make some sort of I'm taking my toys home because I don't like your points crack.

  I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood your response. I thought you had, in response to learning the very obvious fact that the first geologists to dispose of the Flood and the Biblical time-frame were Christians, had been to claim they were, not, in fact "True Christians" even though they claimed to be Christian.

    Did I misunderstand? Did you find any geologists of that period who weren't Christian? Did you give any reason, besides the fact that they were honest about their craft, to label them "non-Christian"?

   I didn't think so.

 
 
Upvote 0

LouisBooth

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2002
8,895
64
✟19,588.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"in fact "True Christians" even though they claimed to be Christian."

You have failed to show where they claimed to be. thus I will not assume that.

"Did you find any geologists of that period who weren't Christian? "

You're the one making the claim. Show me where they claim to be christian.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
49
Visit site
✟20,190.00
Faith
Atheist
  Since reading the links I gave you, or checking out The Creationists seems to be too much of an effort, how about I just cut and paste from here:

If, in the year AD 1600, you had asked an educated European how old the planet Earth was and to recount its history he would have said that it was about 6000 years old and that its ancient history was given by the biblical account in Genesis.

If you asked the same question of an educated European in AD 1900 you would have received a quite different answer. He would have answered that the Earth was ancient, that there had not been a Noachian flood, and that the species of life had not been fixed over the history of Earth. In short, Genesis was an allegory and not literal history.

The story of this great change in the conception of the history of Earth is not a simple one. The chronicle of this great change can be broken into five periods;

The pre-scientific period before AD 1600. In the pre-scientific era the Biblical account and the speculations of the Greek philosophers were accepted without great question.
The era of speculative cosmogonies ran from AD 1600-1700. In this period a number of comprehensive cosmogonies were proposed. These were long on armchair speculation and short on substantive supporting evidence. These cosmogonies were part of the new emphasis of science in seeking rational explanations of the features of the world.

The disestablishment of Genesis ran from AD 1700-1780. This period was marked by a great deal of field geology rather than grand cosmogonies. It became clear that there had been significant changes in the Earth's topography over time and that these changes could neither be accounted for by natural processes operating during the brief nor by the postulated Noachian flood. Notable observations included:

Studies of strata suggested that they were laid down by natural processes in which the sea and land had changed places several times.
Studies of earthquakes and volcanoes showed that the surface crust is subject to massive natural transformation.

Observation of rain, wind, water erosion, and sea erosion in action showed that they were forces capable of reducing mountains and creating valleys.

The catastrophist-uniformitarian debate ran from about 1780-1850. By the end of the 18'th century it was clear that the Earth had a long and varied history. Interest in major cosmogony was revived. The major debate was between the catastrophists, e.g., Cuvier, who held that the history of Earth was dominated by major catastrophic revolutions and the uniformitarians, e.g. Hutton and Lyell, who held that the history of Earth was dominated by slow relatively uniform changes in an Earth with a static over all history. During the early part of this period there was a considerable amount of activity by scriptural geologists who attempted to reconcile Genesis and geology. The efforts of the scriptural geologists failed signally; by 1830 scriptural geology was a dead issue in Science.

The modern period runs from AD 1850 to the present. The great debate was won by the uniformitarians, so much so that the degree of gradualism was overstated and the importance of catastrophes was unduly minimized. The modern period has been marked by an enormous expansion of the detailed knowledge of the geological history of the Earth and the processes that have acted during that history.

Many authors choose to present the history of a complex subject by breaking it up into major threads and following the history of each thread separately. I have chosen instead to provide a chronology of significant works and their authors with a view to providing a sense of how perspectives on Geology changed over time. The selections and comments here are not a complete exposition of the works of the authors mentioned; rather they were chosen to illustrate and exemplify changing perspectives over time.

....

1510  Leonardo Da Vinci: Selections from the Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci. In his notebooks Da Vinci ponders fossil seashells and concludes that they could not have been laid down by the Noachian flood. He wrote:
"If the Deluge had carried the shells for distances of three and four hundred miles from the sea it would have carried them mixed with various other natural objects all heaped up together; but even at such distances from the sea we see the oysters all together and also the shellfish and the cuttlefish and all the other shells which congregate together, found all together dead; and the solitary shells are found apart from one another as we see them every day on the sea-shores.
"And we find oysters together in very large families, among which some may be seen with their shells still joined together, indicating that they were left there by the sea and that they were still living when the strait of Gibraltar was cut through. In the mountains of Parma and Piacenza multitudes of shells and corals with holes may be seen still sticking to the rocks..."
 
1594  Loys le Roy: Of the interchangeable course or variety of things in the Whole world. Le Roy accepted that land and sea could change places and that mountains could be reduced to plains and vice versa. Le Roy was vague about actual mechanisms. He can be considered as a very early uniformitarian. 
1625  Nathaniel Carpenter: Geography delineated forth in two Bookes In this early work Carpenter argued that the Flood could not have been the major agent of geological change, 
1634  Simon Stevin: Second Book of Geology. Stevin followed up Le Roy with arguments that wind and water sufficed as primary agents. 
1637  Rene Descartes: Discours de la Methode. Descartes constructed a history of the Earth which was quite influential; it was the starting point for many later cosmogonies. Some of the main points of his system were that the Earth formed as a fiery ball, that when it cooled a crust formed over the abyssal waters, and that this crust collapsed, releasing massive volumes of water. 
1640  James Ussher: A number of writers calculated the date of creation, using the Biblical chonologies, astronomical records, and historical chronologies. Of these, Ussher's date of 4004 BC is the most famous. Other dates include 3928 BC (John Lightfoot, AD 1644) and 5529 BC (Theophilus of Antioch. AD 169). 
1669  Nicholas Steno: The Produmus. Steno did the basic analysis of how fossils got embedded in stone. From his field observations of the Tuscan landscape he concluded that the Flood was important but did not completely explain the observed geology. 
1681  Thomas Burnet: Sacred Theory of the Earth. Burnet's famous and widely read book reworked Descartes's speculations to fit the biblical account. In his conception the antediluvian Earth was a smooth ovoid. Over time the surface dried out and the abyssal waters were heated. Eventually the surface cracked, releasing the abyssal waters in the Noachian flood. 
1691  John Ray: The Wisdom of God Manifested in the Works of Creation. Ray reworked Burnet's cosmogony. One of the notable features of Ray's works was the thought he put into possible sources for the waters of the flood. Ray accepted that there had been continuous interchange between land and sea. 
1693  Baron Leibnitz: Protogea. Leibnitz reworked Descartes's cosmogony. Protogea was published much later in 1749. 
1695  John Woodward: An essay toward a Natural History of the Earth. Woodward came down fairly strongly for the view that the flood was an act of God that could not be accounted for by normal physical processes. He also postulated hydrological sorting to account for the ordering of fossils. 
1696  William Whiston: A new theory of the Earth.... Whiston added comets to Burnet's cosmogony as the source of the waters of the flood. 
1705  Robert Hooke: Lectures and Discourse of Earthquakes and Subterranean Eruptions. Hooke believed that the fossils were the remains of extinct species and could not be accounted for by the Flood.
"Asking himself how the present areas of land came to be dry, he answers 'it could be from the Flood of Noah, since the duration of that which was but about two hundred natural days, or half a year could not afford time enough for the production and perfection of so many and so great and full grown shells, as these which are so found do testify; besides the quantity and thickness of the beds of sand with which they are many times found mixed, do argue that there must needs be a much longer time of seas residence of the seas above same, than so short a space can afford." 
1748  Benoit de Maillet: Telliamed, or Conversations between an Indian Philosopher and a French Missionary on the Diminution of the Sea. Using Descartes's cosmology, the assumption that the earth was once entirely flooded, and the observation that the sea level was dropping three inches per century near his home, he calculated the age of the earth to be greater than 2 billion years. 
1771  Peter Pallas: Observation sur la Formation des Montagnards.... Pallas made extensive observations of Russian mountains. He observed the results of processes that acted on mountains, e.g. weathering, erosion, deposition, and the fracturing and upheaval of strata. He argued for occasional catastrophic events as an origin for mountain building. 
...

1820  William Buckland: Vindiciae Geologicae. In 1820 Buckland was a scriptural geologist. Thus he wrote:
Again the grand fact of an universal deluge at no very remote period is proved on grounds so decisive and incontrovertible, that, had we never heard of such an event from Scripture, or any other authority, Geology of itself must have called in the assistance of some such catastrophe, to explain the phenomena of diluvian action which are universally presented to us, and which are unintelligible without recourse to a deluge exerting its ravages at a period not more ancient than that announced in the book of Genesis.

  Buckland is of particular importance. You should read up on him:
 
Upvote 0

Sinai

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2002
1,127
19
Visit site
✟1,762.00
Faith
Protestant
Originally posted by Sinai:

Louis, you claimed that it is "doubtful" that the bulk of scientific evidence supports the position that the universe is older than 6000 years. I have asked you if you had any credible evidence in science that supports a 6000-year old universe to "please present it."

Since you have ignored my request, does that mean that you have NO such evidence?

Hmmm.....

.......Apparently, still no answer....
 
Upvote 0

LouisBooth

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2002
8,895
64
✟19,588.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"Since reading the links I gave you, or checking out The Creationists seems to be too much of an effort, how about I just cut and paste from "

I still see no claim that they were christians in that section, which I had read before.
 
Upvote 0

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
49
Visit site
✟20,190.00
Faith
Atheist
 *slam*. First off, you should recognize some of those names. Some of them are often included in AIG's famous "Famous Creationists" lists. Ussher wasn't a Christian? Good Lord! Someone better tell the idiot that made him a Bishop. Descartes wasn't one? Someone knock me over with a feather.

   But most of all, Louis, the second link I gave went to a short bio of Buckland. You obviously didn't read it, but here's the beginning of it:

WILLIAM BUCKLAND: British vicar and paleontologist, and first Professor of Geology at Oxford University. 1784-1856

   Oh, a vicar. That's like an atheist, right?

   Do you want the rest of the list? Heck, let's take five names from the middle, shall we? John Ray was only an ordained Anglican priest, Baron Leibnitz was a Lutheran who held a lifelong goal of reunifying the Church, John Woodward heavily defended the Biblical flood and was an Anglican, William Whiston was an Anglican Rector who ended up a Baptist, Robert Hooke was the curate of the All Saints Church.

    What we've proven here, Louis, is that you didn't even read the list (How anyone could have missed Descartes and Ussher is beyond me. Ussher used the Bible as a historical text to calculate the age of the Earth, as the quote I gave mentioned), didn't even read the first line of the second link, and basically just don't want to admit you're wrong. Virtually all the prominent geologists of the 16, 17, and 18th century were European and Christian. One or two might have been deists. Needless to say, the original (and prevailing) view was that geology would confirm the literal truth of Genesis. Starting well before 1863, and Origins, the literal truth of Genesis was being dismantled by Christians who saw no Flood in the rocks they studied.

 
 
Upvote 0

Smilin

Spirit of the Wolf
Jun 18, 2002
5,650
244
59
Appalachia, The Trail of Tears
Visit site
✟30,906.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by LouisBooth
"I hope and expect that LouisBooth would not abuse his position."

Not at all, this is my opinion as a poster. A cop doesn't arrest you for disagreeing with him on fiscal policy. LOL

 

errrr Louis...I could tell you some stories :D
 
Upvote 0