Young earth vs. ancient earth- where do you stand?

[Guest]

So, what do YEC's think about the apparent age of Earth (or the universe, for that matter)?

From a scientific perspective, it seems there are arguments on both sides for young or old creation. I would like to ask what all of you who are OEC think are the strongest arguments for the age of the earth being old?

As far as arguments for a young earth,there are a couple that seem strong to me. Does anyone who is OEC have any comment about these claims?
1. The presence of detectable C14 in coal, there should have none because C14 decays so quickly.
2. The presence of red blood cells and blood vessels in dinosaur bones seems to be a very good indication that they are not millions of years old.

As far as the apparent age of the Universe, Dr. Humpheries offers an explaination that is consistent with the YEC perspective. The essence of his argument is that the age of the universe is not constant, but varies based upon position. Thus, the earth could be very young, while the distant galaxies are indeed old.

Pete

[Guest]

Thanks Derek, and btw you may be right but some things don't seem to make sense to me like in the YE view how do we get from 30,000 species on the ark to 5,000,000 in 6,000 years?

There may be 5,000,000 species today, but that includes millions of insects and sea creatures which account for the majority of the species in the 5,000,000 you are talking about. None of which were on the arc. Variation within the "kinds" on the arc could account for the rest.

God bless,

[Guest]

howdy all--

where do you stand?

On a scale from 1 to 10 (1 being absolutely certain the earth was created in 6 literal days and less than say 20,000 years old) and 10 being absolutely certain that the 6 days is not literal and the universe is many billions of years old, where would you place yourself on this continuum?

I am interested in your answers.

TK

The way I look at it, it must be at least 56 years old...

[Guest]

The way I look at it, it must be at least 56 years old...

Of course, you could have been created only yesterday in a way that makes you look like you've been around for 56 years with built-in memories that you only think are from 50+ years ago.

[Guest]

Neither the YEC or OEC side disagree about what the earth looks like now, obviously. THe YEC's don't say the earth 'looks' young. They say it looks deluged and destroyed. The OEC say the earth looks the way it does b/c of age. Things can look old for two reasons. Either they've been through a lot or they're actually old. It's a misrepresentation, actually, to say that a YEC thinks everything looks 6000 years old. They actually think it looks like something 6000 years old that's been rampaged by water. Big difference!


My nephew who is a navy pilot visited us a few months ago with his family . His wife was a believer but he was not and the universe age issue was something he brought up because he goes to church because of his kids and the pastor insists on the YEC view. So i shared with him the OEC view which he never heard and over thanksgiving we had a family get together in Ft Laurderdale and praise God he accepted Christ and was just getting baptised. I think allowing for that OEC possibility helped his mind make sense of what he studies in his profession and when things make sense in the mind then it's easier for the heart to receive it. After all Isaiah said "come let us reason together" 1.18 and Paul tried to reason with the people in the synagogue.

[Guest]

My nephew who is a navy pilot visited us a few months ago with his family . His wife was a believer but he was not and the universe age issue was something he brought up because he goes to church because of his kids and the pastor insists on the YEC view. So i shared with him the OEC view which he never heard and over thanksgiving we had a family get together in Ft Laurderdale and praise God he accepted Christ and was just getting baptised. I think allowing for that OEC possibility helped his mind make sense of what he studies in his profession and when things make sense in the mind then it's easier for the heart to receive it. After all Isaiah said "come let us reason together" 1.18 and Paul tried to reason with the people in the synagogue.

Exactly my point! Praise God -- I only think that we should use a lot of grace when dealing with interpretation issues that don't deny Christ -- especially those that are sufficiently vague or unclear (to some, obviously) that reasonable Christians can disagree.

[Guest]

Neither the YEC or OEC side disagree about what the earth looks like now, obviously. THe YEC's don't say the earth 'looks' young. They say it looks deluged and destroyed. The OEC say the earth looks the way it does b/c of age. Things can look old for two reasons. Either they've been through a lot or they're actually old. It's a misrepresentation, actually, to say that a YEC thinks everything looks 6000 years old. They actually think it looks like something 6000 years old that's been rampaged by water. Big difference!


My nephew who is a navy pilot visited us a few months ago with his family . His wife was a believer but he was not and the universe age issue was something he brought up because he goes to church because of his kids and the pastor insists on the YEC view. So i shared with him the OEC view which he never heard and over thanksgiving we had a family get together in Ft Laurderdale and praise God he accepted Christ and was just getting baptised. I think allowing for that OEC possibility helped his mind make sense of what he studies in his profession and when things make sense in the mind then it's easier for the heart to receive it. After all Isaiah said "come let us reason together" 1.18 and Paul tried to reason with the people in the synagogue.

Thanks for sharing about your nephew, that's great.

But it really doesn't have anything to do with the quote of mine that, apparently, promted your response. We could take turns posting testimonies of people saved under Hugh Ross's ministry vs. Ken Ham's ministry and it wouldn't prove anything, right?

I know a guy who is a geologist and w/o being a Christian came to believe the earth was young, eventually he became a Christian and ran across YECism, glad to find that there was a worldview that matched his scientific beliefs. Now he travels around almost every weekend to churches in our area discussing creation/evolution and YEC/OEC. And people are saved via his ministry.

[Guest]

Seth, from what I understand, it was Schroeder's book "The Hidden Face of God" that had a great impact on Antony Flew rejecting atheism. For those who don't know Antony Flew, he was one of the most notorious atheist of our time. He even debated CS Lewis at one time. Although he is not a Christian yet, he now acknowleldges there must be a God.

That's correct...shocking that somebody who believes in evolution should convert an atheist...

Of course, Flew is 80+ years old, so his time is short...hopefully he upgrades from Deist before he meets God.

As far as arguments for a young earth,there are a couple that seem strong to me. Does anyone who is OEC have any comment about these claims?
1. The presence of detectable C14 in coal, there should have none because C14 decays so quickly.
2. The presence of red blood cells and blood vessels in dinosaur bones seems to be a very good indication that they are not millions of years old.

Two links follow...

Carbon in Coal:
http://www.answersincreation.org/bookre ... apter3.htm

Red Blood Cells:
http://www.answersincreation.org/trexblood.htm

One really interesting thing in "Genesis and the Big Bang" is how closely the Biblical account matches evidence from science for the Bronze Age. The Biblical timeline for the use of bronze tools (by Tuval-Cain) matches well with the date for the Bronze age. So if the Flood caused upset in the geology such that dating things is impossible, why would this pre-Flood evidence match so well?

Anyhow...fun stuff to discuss.

[Guest]

pete wrote:

As far as the apparent age of the Universe, Dr. Humpheries offers an explaination that is consistent with the YEC perspective. The essence of his argument is that the age of the universe is not constant, but varies based upon position. Thus, the earth could be very young, while the distant galaxies are indeed old.

this has been my biggest stumbling block fully accepting the the YE view- i.e. the apparent age of the universe and the problem of starlight. Hugh Ross's SHORT response to some YE explanation of the starlight problem can be found here:

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apolog ... erse.shtml

yeah, the flood may have made the earth look older (if you accept a global flood view). but it wouldnt make the moon, or mars, or saturn, etc look older.

dinosaurs are another huge problem for me. no one will convince me they were on the ark; perhaps once i get to heaven i will be stunned to find out that i was wrong. but i dont think so, at least at this point. if dinos co-existed with humans, there would be more than just a few possible cryptic references to them, it would seem.

TK

[Guest]

I found the final statement from that site particularly interesting.

In his testimony before the supreme court, Nobel Laureate physicist Murray Gell-Mann said, and I must agree with him on this point, it would be easier to prove that the earth is flat than to prove that the universe is only a few thousand years old.