Dr. Geisler Weighs in on the YEC Debate

_{Barry Arrington

February 11, 2014

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Excerpt:

After seriously pondering these questions for over a half century, my conclusions are: (1) The Young Earth view is not one of the Fundamentals of the Faith. (2) It is not a test for orthodoxy. (3) It is not a condition of salvation. (4) It is not a test of Christian fellowship. (5) It is not an issue over which the body of Christ should divide. (6) It is not a hill on which we should die. (7) The fact of creation is more important than the time of creation. (8) There are more important doctrines on which we should focus (like the inerrancy of the Bible, the deity of Christ, the Trinity, and the death and resurrection of Christ, and His literal Second Coming. As Repertus Meldenius (d. 1651) put it: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty, and in all things charity.” And by all counts, the age of the earth is not one of the essentials of the Christian Faith.

Comments

CentralScrutinizer:
The first thing I like to ask Biblical literalist, inerrantist, YECs is this: do you actually believe the sun was created on day four of a 24-hour-day cycle or not?
It's not easy to have a morning and an evening without a sun but you'll be surprised what a Biblical literalist will believe in.Mapou_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
10:20 PM
10
10
20
PM
PDT}

drc466: For example: if the days weren’t days – what were they?
The first thing I like to ask Biblical literalist, inerrantist, YECs is this: do you actually believe the sun was created on day four of a 24-hour-day cycle or not?CentralScrutinizer_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
07:44 PM
7
07
44
PM
PDT}

As to death preceding the fall:
Old Earth Creationism and the Fall, William Dembski - Christian Research Journal, volume 34, number 4(2011). Excerpt: My solution (to Theodicy) in my book “The End of Christianity is to argue that, just as the effects of salvation at the cross reach both forward in time (saving present day Christians) and backward in time (saving Old Testament saints), so the effects of the fall reach forward in time as well as backward. What makes the argument work is the ability of God to arrange events at one time to anticipate events at a later time.,,, http://www.equip.org/PDF/JAF4344.pdf Finding a Good God in an Evil World (with nuance on the Garden of Eden) - William Dembski http://www.designinference.com/documents/2009.05.end_of_xty.pdf
Also of note,
Is God Good? (Free will and the problem of evil) - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfd_1UAjeIA
As to the question of whether a free will choice can reach back in time, the answer from physics is yes:
"If we attempt to attribute an objective meaning to the quantum state of a single system, curious paradoxes appear: quantum effects mimic not only instantaneous action-at-a-distance but also, as seen here, influence of future actions on past events, even after these events have been irrevocably recorded." Asher Peres, Delayed choice for entanglement swapping. J. Mod. Opt. 47, 139-143 (2000). Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past - April 23, 2012 Excerpt: The authors experimentally realized a "Gedankenexperiment" called "delayed-choice entanglement swapping", formulated by Asher Peres in the year 2000. Two pairs of entangled photons are produced, and one photon from each pair is sent to a party called Victor. Of the two remaining photons, one photon is sent to the party Alice and one is sent to the party Bob. Victor can now choose between two kinds of measurements. If he decides to measure his two photons in a way such that they are forced to be in an entangled state, then also Alice's and Bob's photon pair becomes entangled. If Victor chooses to measure his particles individually, Alice's and Bob's photon pair ends up in a separable state. Modern quantum optics technology allowed the team to delay Victor's choice and measurement with respect to the measurements which Alice and Bob perform on their photons. "We found that whether Alice's and Bob's photons are entangled and show quantum correlations or are separable and show classical correlations can be decided after they have been measured", explains Xiao-song Ma, lead author of the study. According to the famous words of Albert Einstein, the effects of quantum entanglement appear as "spooky action at a distance". The recent experiment has gone one remarkable step further. "Within a naïve classical world view, quantum mechanics can even mimic an influence of future actions on past events", says Anton Zeilinger. http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html
i.e. The preceding experiment clearly shows, and removes any doubt whatsoever, that the ‘material’ detector recording information in the double slit is secondary to the experiment and that a conscious observer being able to consciously know the 'which path' information of a photon with local certainty, is of primary importance in the experiment. You can see a more complete explanation of the startling results of the experiment at the 9:11 minute mark of the following video
Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment Explained - 2014 video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4
Moreover, time, in the spiritual realm, is 'eternal' and is not the linear progression of temporal time that we are normally use to here on earth:
'In the 'spirit world,,, instantly, there was no sense of time. See, everything on earth is related to time. You got up this morning, you are going to go to bed tonight. Something is new, it will get old. Something is born, it's going to die. Everything on the physical plane is relative to time, but everything in the spiritual plane is relative to eternity. Instantly I was in total consciousness and awareness of eternity, and you and I as we live in this earth cannot even comprehend it, because everything that we have here is filled within the veil of the temporal life. In the spirit life that is more real than anything else and it is awesome. Eternity as a concept is awesome. There is no such thing as time. I knew that whatever happened was going to go on and on.' Mickey Robinson - Near Death Experience testimony - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4045544 'Earthly time has no meaning in the spirit realm. There is no concept of before or after. Everything - past, present, future - exists simultaneously.' - Kimberly Clark Sharp - NDE Experiencer Two very different ‘eternities’ revealed by physics: https://uncommondescent.com/cosmology/the-no-black-holes-uproar-a-week-later/#comment-489771
Thus, though present free will choices 'reaching back in time' may seem odd from our present temporal perspective, from physics and from the consistent testimony of what the spiritual realm is like, there is no contradiction to our present free will choices having 'timeless' spiritual ramifications. In fact, for Christians who believe that their present choice to follow Christ has eternal consequences for their soul this oddity in 'eternal' time should seem rather 'natural' to believe in. Verse and Music:
Matthew 22:29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. Romans 8:38-39 For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Holy Is The Lord - Chris Tomlin http://myktis.com/songs/holy-is-the-lord/
bornagain77_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
06:59 PM
6
06
59
PM
PDT}

As much as I respect Dr. Geisler, I'm going to have to disagree with him slightly. I fully support his points 1-8, but I think his points on the "inerrancy of the Bible" and "the Deity of Christ" are affected by whether you accept Gen. 1-3 as literal or not. As Jesus quotes directly from Gen 1 and Gen 2, we have to accept that He accepted them as part of God's Word. So then, should we read the 7 days as literal 7 days? Honestly, I think there is far too much mental and logical gymnastics required to say that a) the days weren't really 24-hour days and b) living creatures died before Adam's sin. For example: if the days weren't days - what were they? How long did they last? Were they all the same length? And if not - why the emphasis on 7 days later on in the Bible? Why tie a 7-day week and Sabbath to some random-lengthed periods of time that weren't even in the right order, if you believe in the evolutionary timeframe and emergence of life sequence? And why would God, who wrote the Bible to all people with His message phrased in the simplest way possible, deliberately mislead us and thousands of years of people before us who understood Genesis 1 to mean what it said as clearly as possible, only for "educated" types to finally come to a correct understanding in the 19th century? Especially when that "correct" understanding bears no resemblance to Gen 1 at all? Logically, that makes little sense. Having said that, I agree with Dr. Geisler that having the correct view of Creation as God's Work is far more important than the timing or details. And I think you'll find that the embrace of the ID movement as fellow travelers by the majority of YEC'ers shows that to be the case - while ID does not promote Creationism, it allows it, and even provides support for it. (not the YE variety, but we'll get there :) ).drc466_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
06:16 PM
6
06
16
PM
PDT}

scordova @34, Obviously the gospels of Luke and Matthew (and even the Mosaic account) are mistaken because there was no global deluge 4000 years ago. People make mistakes. The evidence against a recent global flood is overwhelming. Nobody has to accept anything in the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Sure, one can find a lot about God in the Bible by searching. And the Bible is not the only source of knowledge either. Certainly, nobody should allow some human preacher to interpret the Bible for them. We should have faith in God, not in the supposed infallibility of a book (that's idolatry) and certainly not in any preacher (that's stupidity). "Search and you shall find" is the responsibility of every Christian, not only the leaders of Christianity (that's the evil doctrine of the Nicolaitans).Mapou_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
10:41 AM
10
10
41
AM
PDT}

The essentials of the Christian faith is what the theology of the thief on the cross. That is one of my favorite passages, he said:
And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Recognize Jesus is the Christ, accept him as savior. The essential of the Christian faith are what God deems necessary for salvation. I could live with an Old Universe, ancient life, etc. but there is one highly important name in Christ's genealogy:
23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,[e] the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. If one accepts Jesus and the Gospel of Luke and Matthew, one is confronted with Noah, and the account of the great flood where only 8 people on Earth were spared. As far as paleontology is concerned, imho, if we actually weighed the geological evidence, it looks like there was a great flood. Whether life or anything else is old, is a separate question. And Christian Baptism corresponds to the flood:
when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you 1 Peter 3
Maybe 500,000,000 died in the flood, 8 were spared. Funny, I can't remember ANY Christian baptism that mentioned Noah's flood in the ceremony. Anyway, maybe God will give us a reminder. The flood motion picture is coming out next month.
scordova_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
09:42 AM
9
09
42
AM
PDT}

Further on the dating of the Noachian Flood: When measuring Biblical periods in harmony with modern dating methods, it should be remembered that cardinal and ordinal numbers differ. Cardinal numbers, such as 1, 2, 3, 10, 100, and so forth, have full value. But with ordinal numbers, such as 3rd, 5th, and 22nd, it is necessary to subtract one to obtain the full number. Thus, in the reference to the “eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar,” the term “eighteenth” is an ordinal number and represents 17 full years plus some days, weeks, or months (whatever time had elapsed from the end of the 17th year).—Jer 52:29. Modern historians are unable to determine any certain date for the beginning of the “historical period” of mankind. Whether they turn to the history of Assyria, Babylon, or Egypt, the chronology becomes increasingly uncertain and unstable as they work their way back through the second millennium B.C.E., and in the third millennium B.C.E. they are faced with confusion and obscurity. To make the count in terms of modern calendar dating, we must use some fixed point or pivotal date with which to commence, that is, a date in history that has sound basis for acceptance and that corresponds with a particular event recorded in the Bible. From this date as a pivotal point we can figure backward or forward and assign calendar dates to many of the events referred to in the Bible. The Bible provides chronological information that allows for a careful count back to the beginning of human history. At Genesis 5:1-29, we find the genealogical line from the creation of the first man, Adam, to the birth of Noah. The Deluge began “in the six hundredth year of Noah’s life.”—Genesis 7:11. We can make calculations and assign to the Flood a date based on the Gregorian calendar now in common use. One pivotal date is 539 B.C.E., the year when Persian King Cyrus overthrew Babylon. Secular sources for the time of his reign include Babylonian tablets and documents of Diodorus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Ptolemy. Because of a decree issued by Cyrus, a Jewish remnant left Babylon and arrived in their homeland in 537 B.C.E. That marked the end of Judah’s 70-year desolation, which according to the Biblical record had begun in 607 B.C.E. By taking into account the period of the judges and the reigns of Israel’s kings, we can determine that the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt occurred in 1513 B.C.E. Bible-based chronology takes us back another 430 years to the making of the covenant with Abraham in 1943 B.C.E. Next we must take into account the births and life spans of Terah, Nahor, Serug, Reu, Peleg, Eber, and Shelah, as well as Arpachshad, who was born “two years after the deluge.” (Genesis 11:10-32) We can thus place the beginning of the Flood in the year 2370 B.C.E. Before we review the events of Noah’s day, you may wish to read Genesis chapter 7 verse 11 to chapter 8 verse 4. Regarding the downpour, we are told: “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life [2370 B.C.E.], in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on this day all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.”—Genesis 7:11. Noah divided the year into 12 months of 30 days each. In ancient times, the first month started about the middle of our calendar month of September. The floodwaters began to fall in “the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month” and continued falling for 40 days and 40 nights during the months of November and December 2370 B.C.E. Regarding the Deluge, we are also informed: “The waters continued overwhelming the earth a hundred and fifty days. . . . And the waters began receding from off the earth, progressively receding; and at the end of a hundred and fifty days the waters were lacking. And in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.” (Genesis 7:24–8:4) So the period from when the waters overwhelmed the earth to the time they receded was 150 days, or five months. The ark thus came to rest on the mountains of Ararat in April of 2369 B.C.E. Now read Genesis 8:5-17. The tops of the mountains appeared nearly two and a half months (73 days) later, “in the tenth month [June], on the first of the month.” (Genesis 8:5) Three months (90 days) later—in Noah’s “six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first day of the month,” or in mid-September, 2369 B.C.E.—Noah removed the covering of the ark. He could then see that “the surface of the ground had drained dry.” (Genesis 8:13) One month and 27 days (57 days) later, “in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month [mid-November, 2369 B.C.E.], the earth had dried off.” Noah and his family then came out of the ark onto dry ground. Hence, Noah and the others spent one lunar year and ten days (370 days) in the ark.—Genesis 8:14. What do these precise records involving events, details, and time factors prove? Simply this: The Hebrew prophet Moses, who evidently based Genesis on records he had received, was presenting facts, not a mythical allegory.Barb_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
08:39 AM
8
08
39
AM
PDT}

“Shader, it really isn’t possible to believe in the global flood of Noah and hold to an old earth at the same time. – unless you believe the God erased all evidence for it or something unscientific like that.” I respectfully disagree. While Noah’s flood may have happened in the recent past (say, between 6,000 to 10,000 years ago), there is nothing in scripture to suggest that this cannot harmonize with a billions-year-old Earth and solar system. That there is geological evidence for a global flood was evident in the 18th century. For example, in 1761 Alexander Catcott, A.M., wrote Treatise on the Deluge, citing what he considered to be proof of the cataclysm. He has been quoted as saying: “We appeal once more to Nature and find that there are, at this day, as evident, as demonstrative, as incontestable proofs of the Deluge over the face of the earth . . . as if it had happened last year . . . Search the earth; you will find the moose-deer, native of America, buried in Ireland; elephants, natives of Asia and Africa, buried in the midst of England; crocodiles, natives of the Nile, in the heart of Germany; shell-fish, never known in the American seas, together with the entire skeletons of whales, in the most inland regions of England; trees of vast dimensions, with their roots and their tops, and some also with leaves and fruit, at the bottom of mines.” And remember, it’s not the data that is questionable, it’s the interpretation of the data. Geology professor John McCampbell once wrote: “The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism [the Flood] and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.” [The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb, Jr. and Henry M. Morris, 1967, p. xvii.}Barb_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
08:36 AM
8
08
36
AM
PDT}

I agree with Dr Geisler. All this sensationalism about how Ham did more harm than good I find discouraging. I also think that YECers should not disdain Old Earth IDers. We both serve the common cause to push back against the irrefutable naturalism that overwhelms and hinders science today and should be united on this. I consider myself a long time UD lurker, so I'm excited to join in on the discussion! Love this sight and others like it!wyatterp_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
07:06 AM
7
07
06
AM
PDT}

JG: Kindly watch the video of the Nye-Ham debate, and look at my reflections here and in the onward linked, put up yesterday after a week's reflection on the matches we are playing with. KF PS: I intervened FTR above because of a repeated line of talking points from several commenters that deals . . . in my opinion, unfairly . . . with something that is in the heart of the historic Christian worldview and Faith.kairosfocus_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
04:38 AM
4
04
38
AM
PDT}

Shader @16 Shader, I was responding to what you wrote in your first post. You claimed Noah's Ark was a necessary teaching but a young earth is not. I simply pointed out that these are contradictory statements/ideas. BA disagrees but the examples he gave of a global flood are nothing like what the Bible teaches so it really doesn't answer the question. You may not be interested in the age issue, but if you hold to a global flood, then I think it makes it very difficult to be a consistent Old Earther at the same time. Were the rocks formed during the flood? If so, they are young. There would have had to be lots and lots of rock formed during the flood if it was indeed global as the Bible teaches. AND, that would mean too that the fossils that were formed in those rocks are what? Young or old? Young of course. It could be no other way! Here is an interesting write up on a new outcrop of the Burgess Shale. http://crev.info/2014/02/new-cambrian-fossil-quarry-beats-burgess-shale/ From the article:
What this also means is that these outcrops are just the tip of the iceberg. The same fossils in the same strata from Canada to China – think of it! Something happened to them that prevented the normal process of decay when animals die. They were all buried so quickly, even their corneas and hearts were preserved. What could do that? Hint: it was global, and it took one year, not 10 million.
I was talking with someone the other day who actually suggested that God caused the flood but miraculously made the evidence of the flood disappear! He was willing to go that far to preserve his views of an old earth. You say that Adam was created 6000 years ago, but then you want to allow for old ages before that. Tell me, what happened during these old ages? Evolution? Death, bloodshed, suffering, disease, etc? Just trying to understand your thinking here. If Adam was created 6000 years ago, then think about this statement that Jesus made in Mark 10:6
"But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female."
Could that mean that Adam was created 6000 years ago, but the beginning of creation was billions of years ago? Hmm.tjguy_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
04:18 AM
4
04
18
AM
PDT}

coldcoffee- Why do you think that the word of God needs to be defended? Look no one knows what the evidence for a global flood would look like. Heck there is allegedly evidence for a snowball Earth. Snow is nothing more than frozen water vapour. Why do you care what the punks at TSZ think anyway? It's not as if they can support materialism and evolutionism. IOW they have no idea what positive evidence for a concept would be. So why are you wasting your time? PS the link they gave you that allegedly refutes Noah's Flood is full of errors. Again those chumps are not worth it.Joe_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
04:17 AM
4
04
17
AM
PDT}

KF. BTW, I'm not tying to put you on the spot. It's a bit of a tricky answer. I just like puzzles like these kinds of puzzles. I read through the book 'How to Move Mt Fuji'. It's all about how high tech companies try to interview and test people they are interviewing with puzzles..and describes some interesting puzzles and tactics. From that book, I found that recursive puzzles are probably among the trickiest. One of my fav tactics they described was how they might interview a person that would serve as a liaison between departments. The interviewer would ask a technical question which required some calculation. The interviewee would answer. The interviewer would receive the answer, and expect a correct answer (and it would be a correct answer), but he/she would tell the interviewee "Close, but..." or "Nice try... The correct answer is ..." and fill in a incorrect answer. The point of this is to see how the interviewee handles the situation, and sells tactfully to the interviewee that the answer he provided was actually correct. The job he was applying for would require such tactful productive communication. Slick ;)JGuy_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
02:27 AM
2
02
27
AM
PDT}

Im an old earth creationist but like Hugh Ross said we and YEC's are only divided by a few zeros. The point is we both believe in creation and we should be respectful of each other's views.wallstreeter43_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
02:20 AM
2
02
20
AM
PDT}

KF. What is the answer? 0?, 1?, 2?,...?JGuy_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
02:15 AM
2
02
15
AM
PDT}

I don't think the age of the earth is crucial for one to be a Christian. But I think it's truth value is important for at least three reasons. If a young earth was 'officially' found true: (1)It would teach people to trust the scriptures. Especially, where it conflicts with any popular materialistic or Godless interpretations of natural evidence about unrepeatable events in the past. (2)It is a unique teaching. Therefore, confirmation of a young earth would exclusively point to Christ. An old earth proof couldn't do that. The old earth is not only anticipated by atheistic and other non-Christian paradigms, it's typically required of materialistically tainted views. (3)Much more science would be done looking in the right places. And better questions would be asked. So, scientific inquiry would be more fruitful... if not at least more confidently. I'm open to an old earth paradigm. But I don't think the scriptures support it, OR the evidence. But I won't judge a Christian that holds an old earth view. I still love them. Perhaps, half of my Christian friends are old earthers. We simply disagree on that point, no negative feelings with each other what-so-ever. It is what it is...that's about it.JGuy_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
02:14 AM
2
02
14
AM
PDT}

JG, of course the two answers are the same. KFkairosfocus_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
02:12 AM
2
02
12
AM
PDT}

KF. I have a puzzle. Is there anywhere on earth a person can walk one mile south, one mile east and one mile north and be back at the starting location? Ifso, from how many points on earth can this be done on earth? :D Don't answer too fast.JGuy_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
01:48 AM
1
01
48
AM
PDT}

MV: UD, generally is not the place for such debates, but something needs to be noted for record. Try here on (in context) for a 101. Meanwhile, ponder if one can stand in one spot on Earth's surface and be due north of London, LA and Tokyo, and what this says about the way we may sometimes mis-perceive irrationality in a counter-intuitive suggestion or idea due to interference by our own prior concepts. KFkairosfocus_{February 12, 2014
February
02
Feb
12
12
2014
12:30 AM
12
12
30
AM
PDT}

Robert # 18
Defending the truth of scripture is as Christian as one can get. Saying it divides is wimps who expect to get their way. If you don’t like YEC then be quiet and let us prevail. Its reaaly people who disagree and want silence so their ideas prevail.
tragic mishap # 19
Just don’t expect me to keep silent about what I know to be true, and definitely don’t ask me to suck it with you.
If those comments are for me, please be aware that it's what I wish you did - go out and defend YEC. What's the point of hanging around in forums which are sympathetic to your views? Unless you interact and defend your views in a combative forum, you will not know why people are indifferent to YEC. Seek their reasoning and counteract it.coldcoffee_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
11:42 PM
11
11
42
PM
PDT}

I can see how a lawyer could weasel his way out of interpreting Genesis in a straightforward manner, but one thing we do know: Before this "issue" of the age of the earth manifested a couple hundred years ago, it wasn't an issue. We also know that the only honest interpretative framework of any text is an unbiased attempt to ascertain the author's intent. Put those two together and we know without a doubt that it could not have been the author of Genesis' intent to have it interpreted as meaning an old earth. Not only do we know this from simple rational deduction, we also know this from the history of the interpretation of Genesis before this "issue" arose. Therefore it is modern people attempting to weasel and lawyer their way into inserting modern information into the meaning of an ancient text written before that information existed. I don't know about you, but my faith isn't so weak as to require the Word of God to be consistent with the word of men. If that is your particular weakness, than far be it from me to rip the pacifier out of you mouth. Just don't expect me to keep silent about what I know to be true, and definitely don't ask me to suck it with you.tragic mishap_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
08:57 PM
8
08
57
PM
PDT}

Defending the truth of scripture is as Christian as one can get. Saying it divides is wimps who expect to get their way. If you don't like YEC then be quiet and let us prevail. Its reaaly people who disagree and want silence so their ideas prevail. The Ham debate showed the battle is on and doing fine. Its not going away . In fact we should not concentrate on targets. ID folks should push for a big smackdown debate with big names. The bad guys are reeling but their prode might be poked.Robert Byers_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
08:29 PM
8
08
29
PM
PDT}

Over at TSZ, I have tried to defend VJT comments I am not a YEC and though I had fun :-) defending YEC, I can't take this any further. I learned about ships, flood stability etc. While I believe it is possible to build the Ark sized ship and may be float it for a few weeks, I find it difficult to believe : 1. A few men could have built such a massive structure 2. The ship could survive more than few weeks in the flood [The stability tests carried out where for short term. Considering that Ark was a wooden ship, the stress would have been too much in the long term] 3. I have problems with historical dates, not just about the pyramids [I am not satisfied with the reasons] but the evolution of species. I am an old Earth believer since there are sufficient evidence to support old Earth and not YEC, so I find it difficult to reconcile to YEC's timelines. I welcome YECs to come from UD and continue to defend the Noah's Ark.coldcoffee_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
07:55 PM
7
07
55
PM
PDT}

Tjguy, you aren't looking at it correctly. The point is that the bible doesn't say hold old the earth and the universe is. So my opinion on the age is that I don't know and I don't care. I feel very little confidence when it comes to mans ability to reconstruct the past. Theories are theories, and I frankly am uninterested in the latest theory regarding the age of the universe. These types if debates that YEC engage in are pointless, fruitless, and distracting. The bible does teach that the flood was an historic event, and that Adam and Eve we're real people living just over 6k years ago. So population studies and studies of the flood and man, without the distraction of the age of the earth/universe, are what I wish biblical scientists would study.shader_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
04:48 PM
4
04
48
PM
PDT}

Of note: 5 Christian Arguments Left Out of the Ken Ham, Bill Nye Debate http://www.christianpost.com/news/5-christian-arguments-left-out-of-the-ken-ham-bill-nye-debate-114148/bornagain77_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
04:19 PM
4
04
19
PM
PDT}

"Shader, it really isn’t possible to believe in the global flood of Noah and hold to an old earth at the same time." I disagree with that, since evidence for 'catastrophic megafloods' is coming from secular sources: Humanpast.net Excerpt: Worldwide, we know that the period of 14,000 to 13,000 years ago, which coincides with the peak of abundant monsoonal rains over India, was marked by violent oceanic flooding - in fact, the first of the three great episodes of global superfloods that dominated the meltdown of the Ice Age. The flooding was fed not merely by rain but by the cataclysmic synchronous collapse of large ice-masses on several different continents and by gigantic inundations of meltwater pouring down river systems into the oceans. (124) What happened, at around 13,000 years ago, was that the long period of uninterrupted warming that the world had just passed through (and that had greatly intensified, according to some studies, between 15,000 years ago and 13,000 years ago) was instantly brought to a halt - all at once, everywhere - by a global cold event known to palaeo climatologists as the 'Younger Dryas' or 'Dryas III'. In many ways mysterious and unexplained, this was an almost unbelievably fast climatic reversion - from conditions that are calculated to have been warmer and wetter than today's 13,000 years ago, to conditions that were colder and drier than those at the Last Glacial Maximum, not much more than a thousand years later. From that moment, around 12,800 years ago, it was as though an enchantment of ice had gripped the earth. In many areas that had been approaching terminal meltdown full glacial conditions were restored with breathtaking rapidity and all the gains that had been made since the LGM were simply stripped away…(124) A great, sudden extinction took place on the planet, perhaps as recently as 11,500 years ago (usually attributed to the end of that last ice age), in which hundreds of mammal and plant species disappeared from the face of the earth, driven into deep caverns and charred muck piles the world over. Modern science, with all its powers and prejudices, has been unable to adequately explain this event. (83) http://humanpast.net/environment/environment11k.htm Further assorted notes on Global Flooding 13,000 years before present: Various Catastrophic Mega-Floods 13,000 years before present from around the world https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sXjqFo9osUO4pWfxsx3Brb565KvqfVIaP1vtDGa95tg/editbornagain77_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
04:17 PM
4
04
17
PM
PDT}

Shader says:
"I would agree with him that YEC is not a necessary biblical teaching. Noah’s ark is, but a 6,000 year old earth is not."
Shader, it really isn't possible to believe in the global flood of Noah and hold to an old earth at the same time. - unless you believe the God erased all evidence for it or something unscientific like that. Either the rock layers and the fossils in them were mainly payed down recently in a global flood or they were laid down by slow and gradual processes over millions of years. They can't be evidence for both. If one of these positions is right, the other must necessarily be false.tjguy_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
04:10 PM
4
04
10
PM
PDT}

Hey Larry, Just fill out the form, and someone may give a hoot. :razz:Joe_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
03:56 PM
3
03
56
PM
PDT}

LarTanner: “Back to the science of ID in 3…2…1…” Are you suggesting that those who are interested in origins issues should not discuss tangential theological implications? If so, so much for Darwin. Under Tanner’s “Don’t talk about that” axiom Origin of Species would be out of bounds. Do you really want to go there Lar?Barry Arrington_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
03:47 PM
3
03
47
PM
PDT}

The Trinitarian Mind: Ignorance or Insanity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a6qD9sWMbImelvinvines_{February 11, 2014
February
02
Feb
11
11
2014
01:52 PM
1
01
52
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3 4 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply