Apologetic argument I am confused by.

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

Good evening all,

I am new to this forum, but I trust this topic will not have been raised already. I am sorry if it has. If so, please direct me to the proper discussion thread.

I recently attended a Creation Magazine seminar at a local church and there was a statement made that I understand in concept, but I still question.

The statement was (Paraphrased) "If the fossil record shows millions of years of death and decay before humans enter into the record why would God call death and decay 'good' or 'very good' in Genesis after the completion of Creation?"

If someone here has an apologetics background please help. I don't want to infuriate anyone, but this statement seems to be (in my opinion) too simple. My assumption is that the fossil record is true and I have read multiple Christian explanations as to how it is not. If need be please just remind me or re-enforce why the scientific data for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years.

maxwel · Jul 30, 2013

It sounds like that apologetic argument can only be used to debate someone who is a Christian AND believes in evolution... a Theistic Evolutionist.

That argument necessitates that the opponent believes both in evolution, AND in the bible, or the argument doesn't work.

There are tons of hard scientific evidence for creation science, and plenty of great philosophical arguments to support creation... but that argument isn't a good one. I would never use that.

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

I'm sure I'll get hounded by this, but so what. God's creation was designed to support life, with humans being the crowning jewel of that life. In order to support life, death needed to occur. We need to eat plants, in some cases the plant dies. The bible states that through the sin of Adam, Sin entered world, but death spread to man, not animals (animals don't sin)(animal death preexisted man's death) Romans 5:12, Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, in this way death spread to all men, because all sinned. Therefore, God prearranged this world for the habitation of man, by supplying all the natural resources (by animal and plant death) we now use as our world develops/or as our needs for these resource increases for our benefit and growth.

Therefore I think, that these fossil did exist millions of years ago before man was created. Romans 8 states that this world was created in bondage to decay, and is groaning for the sons of men to be reveal (glorified at the 2nd coming),
[SUP]19 [/SUP]For the creation eagerly waits with anticipation for God’s sons to be revealed. [SUP]20[/SUP]For the creation was subjected to futility—not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it(not because of man's fall)—in the hope [SUP]21 [/SUP]that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious freedom of God’s children. We know that everything God does works together for our good (Romans 8:28)

Another possible answer is this, Christ's (the 2nd Adam) atonement covers those who trusted in God before Christ's actually death, in other words Christ's death/atonement is proactive. Therefore, is it unreasonable to assume that by Adam (the 1st Adam) that death works the same way, sort of proactive prior to the fall, the same way the atonement of Christ works? That may explain why there is death before Adam, but it doesn't explain why death is good, except that is was God's plan that death would occur so that life can be realized, and true love illuminated by death to demonstrate God's wonderful attributes.

nathan3 · Jul 30, 2013

Clearly the fossil record is there and anyone with eyes can see that .But, It is clear from Gen 1:2 ( Hebrew ) that God destroyed all living things on the earth ( Jeremiah 4: 22- ) . Then you have God bringing in a age of salvation after that. But I will add, just to keep this out the way , is the fossil record shows animals that are alive today with no change.

Remember in Gen 1:1 God says, He created the heaven, and the earth in the beginning. It does not tell you when the beginning was.

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

Thank you both for your replies.

Maxwel you assessment is correct. How would you disagree with theistic evolution? As far as I understand there is a general consensus that the cataclysmic flood created the fossil record. I am okay with that.

Next issue, what about distant starlight? Anybody got one for that?

Bookends I would agree with your statement about animals not sinning and plants not experiencing death. I am still confused as to how one could justify pain in animals though as a good thing.

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

just saw your post Nathan3. Thanks.

Skinski7 · Jul 30, 2013

tjskott said:

Animals do not fall over and die and gradually get covered in dirt and thus become fossilised. Fossilisation requires rapid burial in order to facilitate the specific conditions where the organic matter will not immediately decay. We don't find fossils forming at the bottom of lakes or in marshes today. We do find some examples of fossilisation occuring, the base of fence posts in the right conditions for example.

The fossil record is true but the interpretation of the data is in the eye of the beholder. Evolutionary theory requires millions of years in order to support the gradual changes they believe occurred. Thus a philosophical underpinning leads many people to see "millions of years" when they see or think "fossils."

Both the strata and the fossils we can observe support catastropism and not the gradual burial of organic matter over millions of years. We really just need to use common sense and not let ourselves be confused by the rhetoric of those we consider authorities.

The Bible speaks of a world wide flood occurring and if such an event is historical we ought to see evidence today. The sedimentary strata along with the fossils found in it are an abundant evidence of the flood catastrophe.

Thus in conclusion the scientific date of the fossil record IS NOT biased towards millions of years. Human beings with a philosophical bias towards millions of years read that conclusion into the data.

nathan3 · Jul 30, 2013

tjskott said:

The fossil record, is before the flood. This earth is millions/billions whatever, of years old. The flood of Noah had at least 8 Adamic souls recorded on the ark. and dont forget God said take two of all flesh. Well. Man is flesh .

But before, Noah . In Genesis 1:2 ( no time is given other then "the beginning" in Gen 1:1 For that destruction ( HEBREW )

But your afforded a glimpse of the time in Genesis 1:1 -1:2 in JEREMIAH 4: 22-. There you have the same language used in Genesis 1:2, but it says there was man, but, after that destruction, there was NO man. not even a man on a ark somewhere.

In order to understand this you got to notice these differences .. ( Even with all this time, evolution does not fit into any of this )

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

Star light, tells us the universe in billions years old.
Romans 1:20 [SUP]20 [/SUP]For His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse.

In the book of Hebrews God says He can not lie. The earth shows solid evidences of an old earth, in the millions, the universe in the billions. If the universe and earth tell us through solid evidence they are old, and God's attributes are clearly seen by what He has made, He can't lie about His creation, it has to be old. Our interpret of Genesis 1 is or could be wrong.

God's given us two books, the Bible, His redemptive revelation to mankind, and the book of nature/creation.
Psalm 19

Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

Psalm 19

The Witness of Creation and Scripture

For the choir director. A Davidic psalm.

[SUP]1 [/SUP]The heavens declare the glory of God,and the sky proclaims the work of His hands.
[SUP]2 [/SUP]Day after day they pour out speech;
night after night they communicate knowledge.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]There is no speech; there are no words;
their voice is not heard. (but it is observed, my addition >Bookends)
[SUP]4 [/SUP]Their message has gone out to all the earth,
and their words to the ends of the world.

Skinski7 · Jul 30, 2013

The universe is probably both "old" and "young" at the same time. I speculate this is due to the means by which God created everything.

I have had a keen interest in this subject for many years now and out of the many authors I have read I highly recommend the work of Robert Hermann. He takes a very logical and analytical approach due to his background as a mathematician. From carefully studying his work I clearly see that he approached the idea of creation ungoverned by philosophical bias and thus his approach is very different to the conventional creationist.

Here are two of his articles which you may find useful.

A Brief DVD Illustration for the Biblically Described Creation of Our Universe
DVD Illustration for Universe Creation.

Rapid Formation Model
http://www.raherrmann.com/rfm.pdf

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

Thanks Skinski7. I just needed affirmation that someone else believes in these facts you have presented. Well said.

Skinski7 · Jul 30, 2013

For context here is Robert Hermann's personal statement...

A Personal Statement #1 on the Creationary Model I accept.

extract

The creationary model I accept is rather distinct from those presently being popularized by Answers in Genesis (AiG), the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and the Creation Research Society (CRS) and others. As I point out in the above mentioned DVD illustration, no specific cosmology presented within the present creationary literature includes the requirement that it first include an "eternity" feature that is withdrawn after the Fall. Such a GGU-model per-design yields this requirement. Please do not categorize me as a "YEC" based upon your knowledge of the models presented by such organizations.
In all that follows, the phrase "local environment" means the Earth, sun and moon, and. depending upon evidence and personal choice. could include all of the other named constituents of our solar system.
Although, in what follows, I use some of the terminology found in the mentioned book, not knowing the exact meaning of these terms should not influence basic comprehension. For physical-systems, the term "development" refers to the notion that the formation of entities progresses from definable simple stages to definable complex stages via pre-designed event sequences. For a universe, it means the step-by-step generation of an entire universe as it "appears" at each moment in primitive time.
[1] First, I accept that the Bible teaches that God did not create the physical universe from nothing. It is shown in this article that the idea that God transforms His thoughts into physical reality is a Biblically sound creation scenario. I accept that pre-designed portions of the Genesis sequence (i.e. library) appear rather suddenly in mature or fully functional form as the entities are described in Genesis 1:2 - 31. None of the originally realized biological entities were formed from less complex entities via any form of biological evolution. These biological objects came from a collection of specially designed objects each being termed as a "type-one kind." (See DVD illustration section (3.5-4), where these are defined.)
As to the formation during day-four of the exterior universe, I accept the modern rapid-formation model (RFM) described in my DVD illustration and second belief statement. All of the required GGU-model processes, ultranatural objects and the properton firmament comprise a portion of the "foundations" of the Earth (Job 38:4, Isa 51:13, 16) and are all created over a zero observer (or standard primitive) time interval and comprise one of the two heavens implied by Genesis 1:1. An observer time value corresponds to a primitive time value but primitive need not correspond to observer time. [See zerotime.pdf a technical paper for the notion of zero primitive time internals.]
[2] Although I developed the scientific model for the development of the exterior universe via "in-transit information" and this model remains viable when modified with an "eternity" feature, one needs to determine at what point in the development of the exterior universe realization occurred. As discussed for the DVD illustration and in my second statement, RFM yields an exterior universe over zero "Earth-time" as measured relative to the original Earth. (The Hebrew word often translated as earth ('erets) is also often translated as a portion of the original solar-system object. In these "belief" articles, I use the capital "E" to indicate the entire original earth object.) Earth-time is time measured via any periodic and precise Earth-bound physical-system. Earth-time is a form of observer time.
[3] I accept that the Fall of Adam and Eve triggered a shift in a library or a branch in the Genesis sequence, a shift that altered the local environment to some extent as well as ending any "eternity" feature. The local environment now adheres to some of the describable physical processes that govern the exterior universe as well as now allowing type-two biological alterations. Comparing the created entities prior to the Fall with those that existed after the Fall, indicates that the physical world is now transient. This behavior can be observed as a physical deterioration. But, it is only related to "evil" in the sense that "evil" human behavioral has led to it. Indeed, certain weak aspects of what some incorrectly term as "natural evil" (disease and aging factors) may be considered as now present in this newly realized environment. This is an environment in which Adam and Evil and humankind, in general, were not original designed live. Of course, such physical-system behavior existed in the covirtual or potential form by pre-design, which now becomes reality.

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

Some Christians think just because some believes in an old creation, that must mean they believe in biological evolution. On the contrary, all evidence points to an old universe, about 14 billions years old. This figure, according to evolution scientists, isn't even long enough for biological evolution to occur.

I might add, if Noah's flood killed all the animals, save the ones on the ark, and if that was 4000 years ago, that wouldn't even allow for micro evolution to occur. Thus I don't believe in neither evolution or micro-evolution to the degree that young earth creationist have to believe. Therefore young earthers and global flood supporters, not world-wide flood (the area that was required to wipe out mankind, not all animals- the bible doesn't say all the animals were wiped out) have to come up with quick micro evolution process to support all the variations of kinds we have on the planet today.

SpaceCowboy · Jul 30, 2013

God didn't call death and decay good in Genesis. He called his creation good.

Whoever said that is trying to make something really simple into something really complicated to make it sound like he's besting God.

I personally don't really need a whole lot of scientific evidence of historical things to have sound faith in the Lord. I do realize there are those who have a high regard for accurate scientific proof in regards to strengthening their own personal faith. And no question, its important, (or should I say inevitable?) for believers to research such things to add knowledge to the faith like scripture says to do.
But really, I think if it comes to the point to where knowledgeable pursuits start to make you question the one that that should of been the foundation and inspiration for the pursuit of that knowledge then I'd say it would be time to get back to the basics.

Knowledge puffs up. But love edifies. Head knowledge is good, but spiritual wisdom is best. In Christ are hid ALL the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Godbless

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

Have you ever looked into Hugh Ross, tjskott?

Donkeyfish07 · Jul 30, 2013

tjskott said:

Just because we observe that light travels at a constant speed does not automatically mean it always has....that's just an assumption people make. Not to mention, physics as we understand them today don't really matter when God is actively involved in something....it's not something that limits him.

Both points may not be useful for apologetic but they are both true.

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

Bookends I am listening to Hugh Ross right now.

SpaceCowboy I agree.

Donkeyfish07 I have encountered this idea before, but it does not really help me. I agree with you and I thank you for your contribution.

tjskott · Jul 30, 2013

Skinski7 thank you for the article. I am digging it thus far.

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

Donkeyfish07 said:

God's word says these things are fixed. Jeremiah 31:35
[SUP]35 [/SUP]This is what the Lord says:

The One who gives the sun for light by day,
the fixed order of moon and stars for light by night,
who stirs up the sea and makes its waves roar—
Yahweh of Hosts is His name:

All the evidences prove that as well, inferred measuring and back ground radiation etc. If God had speed up the light, or the universe ran with different clock speeds, the evidence would show otherwise, which it doesn't.

Bookends · Jul 30, 2013

tjskott said:

kewl, Hugh makes a lot of sense to me, the best youtube debate I found was Hugh Ross vs Danny Faulkner. 5 hours.

Apologetic argument I am confused by.

tjskott

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

nathan3

Guest

tjskott

Guest

tjskott

Guest

Banned

nathan3

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

tjskott

Guest

Banned

Senior Member

SpaceCowboy

Guest

Senior Member

Donkeyfish07

Guest

tjskott

Guest

tjskott

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member