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

[Guest]

a new article re supernova:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/05/0 ... index.html

was this really 238 million light years away?

TK

[Guest]

1

Nice post

Well, wasn't that the point of the topic TK started?

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

As for me, I guess I'm about a "2". Which is funny because I thought this would be a big problem for me when I first became a Christian, since I was convinced the earth was old. Why can't God make the earth and starlight the way it is today? What would be the point of starlight if we couldn't see it? I don't understand the concern that God would be fooling us by making it look old. I don't think He's trying to make it look like anything other than a place to live. I think we have preconceived notions of what an old and a young earth "should" look like and interpret the bible through that lens. Is that the way we should do it? For every point a counterpoint could be raised. But how would we know which point is best, if it requires you to be an expert in the field to which the point pertains?

I don't see how making the earth old clears up the fact that many things are buried down there. How did they get buried so deep anyway? I mean, most areas have run off over time from wind/rain erosion. I don't see how we could have huge layers of dirt build up over dead animals and plants (eventually making fossils) except where flowing water deposits sediment or when a large scale event occurs (like a flood, earthquake, tsunami, volcano etc.) and buries them all at once. But maybe that's just me reading my own view into the text.

To put it simply, I believe the earth was made (thousands of years ago) and then flooded (water coming from under the earth and from rain), causing the earth to look as it does today. And I don't have a problem with OEC's. And I don't get hung up on the earth being exactly 6,000 years old. As if we know for sure there weren't some names missed in Genesis 5.

[Guest]

Let's remember Jesus said to love God with all our "mind" meaning he wants us to use our God given intelligence to learn about his creation.
At this point scientists have learned several different methods of measuring the age of the universe and they all end up between 10-20 billion years.
God did not create the universe as some kind of illusion, the measurements now being confirmed over and over, are what they are. The creation days are epochs and insisting they are 24 hour days makes Christians appear to be sticking to a belief that's unrealistic and illusory.
I get to talk to teens about the bible because of my daughter and this issue comes up, i'm glad i can address it without setting up new barriors to belief.

[Guest]

Hi Steve 7150,

Let's remember Jesus said to love God with all our "mind" meaning he wants us to use our God given intelligence to learn about his creation.

Yes and let’s remember, there are allot of very intelligent people who are convinced by the scientific, and biblical evidence that the earth is young.

At this point scientists have learned several different methods of measuring the age of the universe and they all end up between 10-20 billion years.

I hope you are aware that these forms of measurement (potassium argon, and Carbon dating) have addressed successfully by young earth critics.

The creation days are epochs and insisting they are 24 hour days makes Christians appear to be sticking to a belief that's unrealistic and illusory.
I get to talk to teens about the bible because of my daughter and this issue comes up, i'm glad i can address it without setting up new barriors to belief.

Is this what you are worried about? looking silly in front of a secular society? This would not be a very good reason to adopt such a view.

Robin

[Guest]

Is this what you are worried about? looking silly in front of a secular society? This would not be a very good reason to adopt such a view.


If i were worried about how i looked i'd be sinning and if i were worried about how i looked i would'nt talk about Christ's virgin birth and resurrection.
I was referring to the age of the universe not the earth but re carbon dating and the theory that the flood messed up the dating reliability, they have carbon dated from the bronze age which was prior to the flood with the same consistent results as carbon dating after the flood.

[Guest]

Let's remember Jesus said to love God with all our "mind" meaning he wants us to use our God given intelligence to learn about his creation.

It's a bit bold to say that a YEC, like Dr. Russell Humphreys for instance, who has a Ph.D. in physics, and thousands like him, are not "using the intelligence God gave them".

God did not create the universe as some kind of illusion, the measurements now being confirmed over and over, are what they are.

To a young earther, the earth does not appear to be millions of years old, but appears to have be ravaged by a global flood. One's presuppositions about the age of the earth influence the outcome of said measurements. You act as though there are some irrefutable tests that thousands of YEC scientists are merely ignoring.

The creation days are epochs and insisting they are 24 hour days makes Christians appear to be sticking to a belief that's unrealistic and illusory.

Now, here you are saying they are epochs. The thing is, the bible nowhere supports this dogmatic statement. For instance, look at the following verses. God appears to say that He made the earth in six days. To use a favorite OE arguement, "Why would He inspire this verse with the "illusion" of six days if He really meant 40 billion years?"

Exo 20:11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exo 31:17 "It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed."

Also, worthy of note, is that in 20:9-11, God compares the creation week directly to the work week, again giving the "illusion" that He really meant six days.

Exo 20:9 "Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
Exo 20:10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
Exo 20:11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

To interpret vs. 11 as 40 billion years(!) when it is in direct comparison with six literal days in vs.9 makes non-sense out of this passage. I know I always bring this verse up, but it never gets dealt with by old earthers. The context demands that we understand vs. 11 as six litteral days. All anyone ever says is "a day is like a thousand years", etc. But that does not answer the problem that the context of this verse poses for the OEC position.

Could you offer your exegesis of Exodus 20:9-11? It would greatly benefit me, in understanding the Old Earth position, if I could see someone deal with this passage.

By the way, I've checked out some old earth stuff over this last year, and have enjoyed reading a bit of Hugh Ross. I think he's brilliant and a real man of God. However, it seems that no matter how compelling their scientific arguments, thier biblical arguments fall flat. At this point, I am unwilling to make scripture say what it clearly does not.


God bless bro,

[Guest]

To interpret vs. 11 as 40 billion years(!) when it is in direct comparison with six literal days in vs.9 makes non-sense out of this passage. I know I always bring this verse up, but it never gets dealt with by old earthers. The context demands that we understand vs. 11 as six litteral days. All anyone ever says is "a day is like a thousand years", etc. But that does not answer the problem that the context of this verse poses for the OEC position.

Derek, This is the YECs best shot IMHO and i know you won't buy it but this is how i see it. Yes it says "in six days" therefore the answer must be the following if OE are correct. God is commanding a symbolic honoring of creation from man and commanding man to carry this out in "man days" which are 24 hours each because man is on earth and subject to the laws of the earth and sun.
God days are different and are not subject to the limitations of man and man's reliance on the sun. Already in Genesis two we see the word "day" not used as a 24 hr period "in the day of creation."
And yes in Psalm 90 Moses did indicate a God day is not 24 hours and once we allow for the possibility a God day is not 24 hours, then it can be any length of time.

[Guest]

Yes, you're right. I don't buy that. I don't think that exegesis of that passage allows for "man days" and "God days".

God bless,

[Guest]

It's a bit bold to say that a YEC, like Dr. Russell Humphreys for instance, who has a Ph.D. in physics, and thousands like him, are not "using the intelligence God gave them".


I did'nt mean to sound like i was implying anything about YECs , i meant that since virtually everyone concedes that the universe appears to be about 15 (not 40) billion yrs old then IMO God who encourages us to use our minds would not create the illusion of an old universe.

[Guest]

It's a bit bold to say that a YEC, like Dr. Russell Humphreys for instance, who has a Ph.D. in physics, and thousands like him, are not "using the intelligence God gave them".


I did'nt mean to sound like i was implying anything about YECs , i meant that since virtually everyone concedes that the universe appears to be about 15 (not 40) billion yrs old then IMO God who encourages us to use our minds would not create the illusion of an old universe.

"Virtually everyone" are pagans, and evolutionists too, and bring those presuppositions to their research. Where do we draw the line at when we agree with them? If your answer is "when the bible contradicts them", then you got some 'splainin to do, because the bible really doesn't support the OEC position as strongly. It requires what can only be called eisogesis of passages like Ex 20:9-11 to even begin to fit it into a biblical worldview.

And again, YEC's do not think that the earth has the "illusion" of being billions of years old. The only people that use that terminology are OEC's.