Young Earth Creationism

[Percivale]

That's because you deny the existence of signs and wonders that the Bible talks about. Atheists may not believe in miracle, but they understand what they are and know they are scientific anomalies or even vocations of science. It's really just a matter of your hostility toward the Bible.

I'm not hostile toward the Bible. Are you hostile toward science?

 

[Calminian]

I'm not hostile toward the Bible....

I don't know about hostile. Let me put it this way. You deny the biblical concept of miracles. I think you've chosen not to believe the plain reading of the text in order to harmonize it with your own view of reality.

 

[KWCrazy]

Again, you stopped the quote at vs 14, why did you not examine vs 15?

You need the rest of the chapter? Okay, here.

15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

17 Thou shalt not kill.

18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.

19 Neither shalt thou steal.

20 Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.

21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

22 These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

23 And it came to pass, when ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, (for the mountain did burn with fire,) that ye came near unto me, even all the heads of your tribes, and your elders;

24 And ye said, Behold, the Lord our God hath shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth.

25 Now therefore why should we die? for this great fire will consume us: if we hear the voice of the Lord our God any more, then we shall die.

26 For who is there of all flesh, that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived?

27 Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God shall say: and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it, and do it.

28 And the Lord heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the Lord said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee: they have well said all that they have spoken.

29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

30 Go say to them, Get you into your tents again.

31 But as for thee, stand thou here by me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgments, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it.

32 Ye shall observe to do therefore as the Lord your God hath commanded you: ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left.

33 Ye shall walk in all the ways which the Lord your God hath commanded you, that ye may live, and that it may be well with you, and that ye may prolong your days in the land which ye shall possess.

Better? Now read and understand that verse 15 reminds the Israelites that after they were freed Moses went to Mt Sinai and received the 10 Commandments as Exodus 20:11 states. "Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee" is past tense; not a new commandment but a reminder of the earlier commandment to keep the Sabbath. Any representation that the Sabbath was created to remind the Israelites of their freedom is a complete fabrication. In other words, it's a blatant and deliberate lie. The intent of the Sabbath was revealed by God in Exodus 20:11.

Now put down the talking points of the godless and read the words of the Creator. Exodus 20:11 "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." This is the purpose of the creation of the Sabbath which happened in Genesis and was carved in Stone by God in Exodus.

 

[Percivale]

Calminian keeps falsely accusing me of denying miracles, KWcrazy calls what I find to be the plain reading of scripture a blatant lie. I'm done with this discussion.

 

[KWCrazy]

Calminian keeps falsely accusing me of denying miracles, KWcrazy calls what I find to be the plain reading of scripture a blatant lie. I'm done with this discussion.

There is no possible way to read the text complete with the citation of earlier writing and conclude that the Sabbath was created to remind the Israelites of the exodus. To repeat this is false teaching and heresy. The intent is to convince Christians that Exodus 20:11 is not the true word of God so it can square with the lie of universal common descent. The question is, are you interested in what is actually written or is it your intent to continually misrepresent the Bible and pretend that the Sabbath had nothing to do with a six day creation? If you repeat something not knowing it is untrue then you've made a mistake. If you know it's untrue then you're lying. That's the distinction. We don't get to choose which verses we agree with. The six day creation violates all the laws of science, but we know it's true because God said it. It's not a made up belief, it's the word of the Creator Himself.

 

[mark kennedy]

There is no possible way to read the text complete with the citation of earlier writing and conclude that the Sabbath was created to remind the Israelites of the exodus. To repeat this is false teaching and heresy. The intent is to convince Christians that Exodus 20:11 is not the true word of God so it can square with the lie of universal common descent. The question is, are you interested in what is actually written or is it your intent to continually misrepresent the Bible and pretend that the Sabbath had nothing to do with a six day creation? If you repeat something not knowing it is untrue then you've made a mistake. If you know it's untrue then you're lying. That's the distinction. We don't get to choose which verses we agree with. The six day creation violates all the laws of science, but we know it's true because God said it. It's not a made up belief, it's the word of the Creator Himself.

He seems to have bailed on you but the obscure nature of your post has me curious. The Sabbath was established during creation week, the seventh day obviously. It's always been taken to represent the fact that creation was finished so God stopped working. In Hebrews the indication is that the Sabbath rest is faith in the completed work of Christ:

Therefore I was angry with that generation,
And said, ‘They always go astray in their heart,
And they have not known My ways.’
So I swore in My wrath,
‘They shall not enter My rest.’”
Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. (Heb. 3:10-12)​

How could we not find that disturbing, they hardened their hearts so God would not let them enter His rest. The immediate context in light here are the unbelieving Hebrews who refused to enter the promised land for fear. In judgment God swore that generation would never enter, with the exception of three, Joshua, Caleb (who they nearly killed btw) and Rahab the Canaanite prostitute that helped the spies and is included in the genealogy of Jesus.

What that could possibly have to do with the laws of science I don't know but there is a premise of the faith in creation:

I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only begotten Son of God,
begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made; (Nicene Creed)​

That's the first three stanzas of the Nicene Creed, Catholics, Orthodox and Protestant churches will tell you that at a bare minimum, you believe this, or you are not a Christian. In the three opening stanzas you have a confession that Christ is God the Son, sandwiched between two confessions of God as Creator. Theology does not predicate its core axioms on laws of science, it is predicated on truths that transcend everything else, the doctrine of Creation is one of those doctrines.

Creation is essential doctrine and we do well to continually remind Darwinians of all stripes, Theistic or otherwise, you either believe it or you are not a Christian. Indeed we vary on some of the details and I often clash with other Creationists on the timeline and such but to worship Christ as Savior and Lord is to worship Him as Creator. Theistic Evolutionists are strangely silent on this particular point of doctrine.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[KWCrazy]

Theistic Evolutionists are strangely silent on this particular point of doctrine.

Theistic evolutionists are universally unable to present Scripture to validate what they profess. At best we get twisted misrepresentations taken deliberately out of context to fabricate credibility where none exists. I see this as false prophesy and heresy; not because they are teaching in error what they sincerely believe but because they falsify Scripture to give credibility to their untenable positions. If the Bible is wrong about the Creation, and if the Creation is the cornerstone of the Bible, then how could the Bible be trusted for anything? This testimony does not glorify God, rather it attacks the veracity of the Scriptures and serves only to undermine the faithful.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Theistic evolutionists are universally unable to present Scripture to validate what they profess. At best we get twisted misrepresentations taken deliberately out of context to fabricate credibility where none exists. I see this as false prophesy and heresy; not because they are teaching in error what they sincerely believe but because they falsify Scripture to give credibility to their untenable positions. If the Bible is wrong about the Creation, and if the Creation is the cornerstone of the Bible, then how could the Bible be trusted for anything? This testimony does not glorify God, rather it attacks the veracity of the Scriptures and serves only to undermine the faithful.

You approach the Bible as if every word is LITERALLY true. There is no room in your schema for myth or allegory. One can believe that God is the First Cause who set in motion the forces that brought an abundance of life to this planet through evolution and not contradict the Bible.

 

[mark kennedy]

You approach the Bible as if every word is LITERALLY true. There is no room in your schema for myth or allegory. One can believe that God is the First Cause who set in motion the forces that brought an abundance of life to this planet through evolution and not contradict the Bible.

Creation is never presented in figurative language, Genesis is an historical narrative especially in the opening passages. There is no hint of a figurative creation in the New Testament references to creation in general or Adam in particular. The chant of Theistic Evolutionists that Genesis 1 is mythology is pedantic at best and identical to the rhetoric of Darwinian atheistic materialists.

Evolution is the change of alleles in populations over time, not the a priori assumption of universal common descent by exclusively naturalistic means. The former is the scientific definition for evolution and the latter is Darwinian naturalistic assumptions. It is the heart of the error that the two are equivocated. At the same time dismissing historical narratives inextricably linked to essential doctrine goes beyond simple error.

If God's creation in Genesis 1 is figurative then what else are you taking figuratively? The incarnation, resurrection, how about the new creation of John 3 or Revelations 22? How is chanting the mantra of figurative interpretation any different then simple unbelief?

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[miamited]

You approach the Bible as if every word is LITERALLY true. There is no room in your schema for myth or allegory. One can believe that God is the First Cause who set in motion the forces that brought an abundance of life to this planet through evolution and not contradict the Bible.

Hi steve,

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that there is no allegory contained in the Scriptures. Jesus' parables come to my immediate mind. However, as with any writing, the question for the reader to discern is what is and what isn't allegorical in nature. As for myth, no, I would be hard pressed to label any part of the Scriptures as such.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Willtor]

Hi steve,

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that there is no allegory contained in the Scriptures. Jesus' parables come to my immediate mind. However, as with any writing, the question for the reader to discern is what is and what isn't allegorical in nature. As for myth, no, I would be hard pressed to label any part of the Scriptures as such.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Why are you hard pressed to label any part of Scripture as myth? Is it because no part appears to be that kind of literature, or because it is difficult to conceive of a true myth?

 

[miamited]

Why are you hard pressed to label any part of Scripture as myth? Is it because no part appears to be that kind of literature, or because it is difficult to conceive of a true myth?

Hi willtor,

I suppose the answer would be that I don't think like you. However, my response to your questions would be yes.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Percivale]

KWcrazy: Deuteronomy says: "you were slaves...THEREFORE God commanded you to keep the sabbath day." Therefore means 'for the reason just given.' I know your church's theology is not comfortable with what the Bible says here, nor with the fact that it does not record any command to keep the Sabbath before Moses. But I figure if your church says something that's not in the Bible you don't have to believe it. Again, God can have multiple reasons for giving a command: 1 God's pattern of creation and rest. 2 remembrance of Israel's slavery and deliverance.

Genesis 1 may literally be referring to longer periods of time. The word day can be used with a number without referring to a 24 or 12 hour period, as in Hosea 6:2. Evening and morning seems to be used as a metaphor for 'continually', or 'over a significant period' in Ecclesiastes 11:6. And the degree to which the passage parallels the fossil record when read that way seems to be a confirmation that it should be interpreted that way.

 

[Calminian]

KWcrazy: Deuteronomy says: "you were slaves...THEREFORE God commanded you to keep the sabbath day." Therefore means 'for the reason just given.' I know your church's theology is not comfortable with what the Bible says here...

This deduction is not valid, though. God said were slaves but now are free. Thus now you can keep the Sabbath, is the plainest easiest most straightforward way to understand that. The passage makes no mention of when the Sabbath originated, but the Israelites certainly knew their history and knew about the creation account.

Just to look at a parallel example, there is also no specific command from God to make animal sacrifices until the Mosaic law, yet we see in done over and over long before Moses' time.

It's also interesting we see the 7 day work week in many cultures of the world, in fact almost all. I believe that just as men followed God's lead in making burnt offerings, so they also followed His lead in working six days and resting one.

Genesis 1 may literally be referring to longer periods of time. The word day can be used with a number without referring to a 24 or 12 hour period, as in Hosea 6:2. Evening and morning seems to be used as a metaphor for 'continually', or 'over a significant period' in Ecclesiastes 11:6. And the degree to which the passage parallels the fossil record when read that way seems to be a confirmation that it should be interpreted that way.

Yom in the hebrew is virtually identical to day in english. Both can be used several different ways depending on context. The irony is, there are no disputed understandings of the word day anywhere else in scripture, except in Gen. 1 by some. Why is that? Why is it so easy to understand it everywhere else, yet here, an evening morning day is unclear?

So what I would ask is, what would you need to see in scripture to confirm a day was literal? IOW's if it's not clear that day means day in Gen. 1, when does it definitely mean day?

 

[miamited]

Genesis 1 may literally be referring to longer periods of time. The word day can be used with a number without referring to a 24 or 12 hour period, as in Hosea 6:2. Evening and morning seems to be used as a metaphor for 'continually', or 'over a significant period' in Ecclesiastes 11:6. And the degree to which the passage parallels the fossil record when read that way seems to be a confirmation that it should be interpreted that way.

Hi percivale,

That's going to depend on what Hosea was talking about. It speaks of Israel being restored and then says on the third day He will restore us. That's exactly what the resurrection of Jesus was supposed to do. After Jesus' two days in the tomb, remember it says 'after two days', he was restored on the third. It was at that moment that God gave proof to Israel, and all of mankind, that He can do what He has promised to do.

If this is what Hosea is speaking of, then the 3 days are 3 literal days. It was on the third day that God gave testimony to all of mankind that He will raise His righteous ones to life and they were then able to have hope that they would live in His presence.

In Ecclesiates we are encouraged to sow our seed in the morning. Why do you think that this is not talking about sowing seed in the first part of the day? Then He says let not your hands be idle in the evening. Why do you think this is not talking about the second half of the day? I honestly always understood that passage to mean that we should do our work in the morning, but not then rest and be idle in the evening of any singular day. And the reason given is that we can't trust that our morning work will be successful and it may well be our evening work that is. So, while this may not be speaking of a particular day, I believe that it is speaking of what we should be doing in both the morning and evening of any day.

It is not saying that we should work only in the first half of the month and not rest in the second half; or the first half of a year and not rest in the second half; or the first half of a century and not rest in the second half; or any other portion of time but merely 'a day'.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Willtor]

Hi willtor,

I suppose the answer would be that I don't think like you. However, my response to your questions would be yes.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

I suspect it is difficult because our culture doesn't do this. In fact, our culture uses the word "myth" to describe something that is _not_ true. Nevertheless, many cultures throughout history have used mythology to express eternal truths.

 

[miamited]

I suspect it is difficult because our culture doesn't do this. In fact, our culture uses the word "myth" to describe something that is _not_ true. Nevertheless, many cultures throughout history have used mythology to express eternal truths.

Hi willtor,

The answers are still 'yes'. The 'fact' that some cultures use mythology to express 'eternal truths' doesn't alter the 'fact' that the mythology is a myth. It just means that the myth was conceived to express an eternal truth. The foundational story line is still a myth.

So, I'm still unable to conceive of a 'true' myth, but I would gladly accept that a made up story might be told to give understanding of an eternal truth. That doesn't, however, change the position of the myth.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Steve Petersen]

Myths are stories that convey truths about the world.

As our knowledge of the world changes, our myths must also change.

 

[KWCrazy]

You approach the Bible as if every word is LITERALLY true. There is no room in your schema for myth or allegory. One can believe that God is the First Cause who set in motion the forces that brought an abundance of life to this planet through evolution and not contradict the Bible.

If this were possible some TE would be able to supply Scripture to support it. In 12 years, I have yet to see anyone rise to the challenge. Those who tried deliberately took verses out of context and were shown to be wrong by merely posting the previous and subsequent verses. TE has no Scriptural basis.

 

[KWCrazy]

KWcrazy: Deuteronomy says: "you were slaves...THEREFORE God commanded you to keep the sabbath day." Therefore means 'for the reason just given.'

What was God talking about?
The Sabbath? What was that?
Oh, yeah; the day God rested after the six day creation as attested in Genesis 2:2 and re-stated in Exodus 20:11.
The Israelites were commanded to keep the Sabbath Holy. The Sabbath was not a new concept to them. The knew what they were being told. In Nehemiah 9 we read: "13 You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just and right, and decrees and commands that are good. 14 You made known to them your holy Sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses." The Sabbath was already God's holy day. He just chose to have the Israelites recognize it after the exodus.

Genesis 1 may literally be referring to longer periods of time.

No, it cannot. No true scholar will agree with you. When the days are numbered and described with a morning and evening, there is no possible way it could equal long periods of time unless the earth was in an extremely slow rotation. Even then, if the days were a thousand years long then the nights would be as well.

The word day can be used with a number without referring to a 24 or 12 hour period, as in Hosea 6:2.

Hosea 6 is a psalm or poem. It has no relationship to Genesis 1.

Evening and morning seems to be used as a metaphor for 'continually', or 'over a significant period' in Ecclesiastes 11:6.

With entirely different verbiage, day can be used to express time periods such as "in the days of Moses. This is an entirely useless argument, because the context of Genesis disallows any such interpretation. Further, the Israelites were expected to honor the seventh day, not the seventh century.

And the degree to which the passage parallels the fossil record when read that way seems to be a confirmation that it should be interpreted that way.

The Holy Spirit interprets Scripture, not your science teacher. The sequence of creation disallows any theory of common descent and the chronologies in the Bible disallow great age. In short, your position is untenable according to the Scriptures.