Young Earth Creation. Does it matter what you believe?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T

Tintin

Guest
There comes a time in many threads where you know about where facts turn into nothing but IMOs. The moment this 98 year old man join this site over a year ago to do nothing but taunt creationist was one of those significant moments. And now that he's joined this thread exclusively to do the same thing ad nauseam, it's time to put this youngster to bed. (Him. Mot me. There is no way I will ever believe a 98 year older can't think of anything better to do than taunt YECs.)
He's not 98 years old. He's lucky if he's a teenager. Either way, he's all for bashing YEC and never talks about the hope found in Jesus.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
Part of her secret is she joined last year, but didn't start "participating" until four weeks ago. (Me snoop? You betcha! lol)
Oh, Jackie's been here and involved for ages. He just sticks to the threads that either promote evolution or promote contrary beliefs. Offering his 'wisdom' where it's not needed.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
Tank, don't you have to abandon your origins beliefs to practice as a biochemist? If that truly is what you are.
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
you can read 'radioisotopes and the age of the earth' edited by dr. larry vardiman and dr. andrew snelling and dr. eugene chaffin...a two volume set reporting the preliminary and final research of the institute for creation research's project on radiometric dating...

or if that is too much...you can read the easier summary...'thousands not billions' by dr. don deyoung... oh and for the record that was not condescension...the full two volume set -is- very technical and long...

here is a very short summary of the main weaknesses of radiometric dating...

1...you cannot assume that you know the ratio of parent to daughter isotopes present in the rock at the moment of its formation...significant amounts of daughter isotope atoms can be present in the magma which will skew a naive radiometric dating of that rock... using isochron plots can help alleviate this difficulty...but this method is not entirely without potential errors either...

2...you cannot assume that the rock you are dating is a closed system...various chemical processes can add or take away material from the rock...including the parent and daughter isotope atoms you are using to determine the rock's age...and this can happen in ways that will skew the dating of the rock... isochron plots can also help with this problem...but the solution is more complex in this case...

3...you cannot assume that radioactive decay rates have been the same all through history...and the very clever method of isochron plots unfortunately -cannot- detect or mitigate this particular source of uncertainty... one of the major findings of the ICR's project is that there is significant evidence that decay rates -have- varied in the past...and that there is a pattern to the variations that suggests certain physical causes...
When I was in college, I was supposed to read this thick book on linguistics. (One of those books in the syllabus, but never taught in class, and never any questions from it on the test.) The book weighed five pounds, and yet I still fell asleep -- sitting up -- four times in the first chapter. To this day, I regret selling that book to recoup wasted money. It was a great sleeping pill.

I might get that two volume set for the same reason. lol
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
Okay, who invited you Jack Spratt?
In all fairness, Jack Spratt could eat no fat. This Jack is full of bologna. (I so hope that joke crosses oceans. Just in case, "Full of bologna" is American for full of nothing/herself/fresh manure/junk/fatty deli meat. lol)
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
The Bible records roughly 4,000 years of history from Creation to Jesus coming to earth as a man. You do the Maths.
I really can do the math differently. There is the possibility that not all generations were represented by a person's name in Adam and/or Cain's genealogy. After all, what is the likelihood a son has as many generation and at the same time as his father? I'm not saying I'm right, but that is a possibility.
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
Gobekli Tepe in Turkey is a truly awesome archaeological site. I would love to visit there one day (but the area is just too dangerous at the moment. Put into the time-frame of the Bible (as it's written), Gobekli Tepe would be one of the most ancient remaining structures to date. It would be a post-Flood site, most likely post-Babel site. So, Gobekli Tepe for all intents and purposes would be a few hundred years over 4,000 years old. Ancient people weren't stupid, they were geniuses. We're the stupid ones (in comparison).
This is not disagreement, merely a question. Why can't it be an antediluvian site? (And because that's a real question, my logic against that is what is the likelihood the ark landed so close to where it started, except 12 months could make for one or more trips around the world.)

On the other hand, completely agree on how much smarter the ancients were. I still marvel that the Israelites made elaborate candlesticks out in the wilderness, and they didn't even need wax or wicks through the wax!
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
Tank, don't you have to abandon your origins beliefs to practice as a biochemist? If that truly is what you are.
The scientist who proved some of the dinosaurs were warm-blooded is a YEC. You don't have to give up your beliefs to be included in the scientific world. They simply will give you more grief (and won't ask you to pray before their special award suppers. lol)
 
T

Tintin

Guest
I really can do the math differently. There is the possibility that not all generations were represented by a person's name in Adam and/or Cain's genealogy. After all, what is the likelihood a son has as many generation and at the same time as his father? I'm not saying I'm right, but that is a possibility.
Not so with Adam's chrono-genealogy, but with say Jesus genealogy, yes, there are some men missing. Early Genesis doesn't necessarily list the eldest child in each family, but only lists the ones essential to God's narrative for humanity. That said Adam's chrono-genealogy lists the ages of each from birth to death, birth to death and so on. There's no real wiggle-room.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
This is not disagreement, merely a question. Why can't it be an antediluvian site? (And because that's a real question, my logic against that is what is the likelihood the ark landed so close to where it started, except 12 months could make for one or more trips around the world.)

On the other hand, completely agree on how much smarter the ancients were. I still marvel that the Israelites made elaborate candlesticks out in the wilderness, and they didn't even need wax or wicks through the wax!
Good question. The only reason Gobekli Tepe can't be a pre-Flood site is because that world no longer exists as they knew it. Great violence was done to the Earth during the flood eg. massive volcanic activity, tsunamis and earthquakes during and after. The land tore apart into continents during the Flood. The land went up and down, it went below the waters. The earth's crust was forever changed. As such, the land that replaced it doesn't show any evidence of life before the Flood. All archaeological sites therefore must be post-Flood. In short, a world-wide Flood that destroyed every living thing would also wipe away any human-made structures.
 

Budman

Senior Member
Mar 9, 2014
4,153
1,999
113
The scientist who proved some of the dinosaurs were warm-blooded is a YEC. You don't have to give up your beliefs to be included in the scientific world. They simply will give you more grief (and won't ask you to pray before their special award suppers. lol)

They also don't like when some of their own finds dinosaur bones with soft tissue still in them. :D
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Simply rubbish.
Jesus said, "“But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’” Mark 10:6

He didn't imply Adam and Eve came millions of years afterwards but from the beginning. And that is both from the Critical Text and the Majority Text.

Your pseudo science does not match that.
Amen bro.

You can not be a bible student and believe in gap theory, or in an old earth, they just do not Jive.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Ya had me up to the last line. (That's not a bad thing. Not like we all have perfect knowledge or agreement.)

Honestly, I always assumed God made angels before his first "Let there be..." So, cool thinking on your part. Observant.

I'm just going to respectfully disagree with angels and light connection, simply because there's not enough info to clearly say that one.
I would say that goes with alot of things. I love andrew snellings catostrophic past, and Dr Browns Hydroplate theory, 2 different theories (plate technotnics vs hydroplate) but I think both have truth to them.. I doubt any one person has the whole truth, but as men study the earth, they find new things every day,

Plus I think God helps them som (ie mt st Helens and the mini grand canyon, the fossils, the petrified wood, the sedentary layers, all things science had previously had to take thousands or millions of years. happened in a manner of a few days. )


of course people like bowman and jackh do not want to hear these things, so they will do as they have been doing and try to tear you down as stupid, because they have no answers.. Attack the messenger because you can;t attack the message sort of thing
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
The Bible records roughly 4,000 years of history from Creation to Jesus coming to earth as a man. You do the Maths.
remember, the bible is not his authority on spiritual matters, Men are, And who gave you the rite of private interpretation? You cant add literal numbers in the bible and come up with an actual answer. thats not allowed! Only these men are aloud to do that,

and even though I did the math, and you are right, they are aloud, you are not, so they are right! No matter what the math says!!


Whew.. How do they come up with these silly answers.. the point is, he would just say, even though you may be right you are wrong, Well he would not say the first part..
 
W

wildfry

Guest
The confusion on creation dates occurs because the dating of the creation of Adam and Eve by Yahweh is correctly calculated at 6,000 years ago and described in Genesis chapter 2. This period of 6,000 years is calculated taking the ages of Adam's descendants down to recorded history. People unfortunately then attach that date to the six days of creation in Genesis chapter 1. The original Hebrew text gives a clearer delineation between chapter 1 and chapter 2, but in translation it feels much closer. The creation story of Genesis 1 could have occured thousands of years before the creation of Adam and Eve. Hope this is helpful.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
The confusion on creation dates occurs because the dating of the creation of Adam and Eve by Yahweh is correctly calculated at 6,000 years ago and described in Genesis chapter 2. This period of 6,000 years is calculated taking the ages of Adam's descendants down to recorded history. People unfortunately then attach that date to the six days of creation in Genesis chapter 1. The original Hebrew text gives a clearer delineation between chapter 1 and chapter 2, but in translation it feels much closer. The creation story of Genesis 1 could have occured thousands of years before the creation of Adam and Eve. Hope this is helpful.
could have does not mean it must have, A huge difference.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,778
6,936
113
Doesn't matter to me what folks believe one way or the other, it's not like this earth is eternal or nothing........