Young Earth vs. Old Earth, Does it matter?
- Thread starter superdave5221
- Start date
-
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.
Hello Rachel,
I remember arguing with you about this very issue. At the time, I had more faith in man's Uniformitarianism, then in God's Word. God has since blessed me with a greater discernment and He has used people in this very forum for that purpose.
It is interesting that according to Ken Ham, the word "day" is used more than 2000 times in the Bible. And the only place we have a problem in understanding what the word means is in Genesis. Is this because we have to somehow find a way to fit millions or billions of years into the record somewhere?
According to Mr. Ham, whenever the phrase, "evening and morning", is used with day, or day and night, or day and a number, it almost always means a literal 24 hour day.
What should we tell our children, or our neighbors? The Bible is the authoritative Word of God and you can trust and rely on it, all except Genesis 1-11? Jesus, by the way, affirmed the truthfulness of practically all of the problem ideas presented in Genesis when He walked on the Earth, so this is not just an O.T. issue.
You stated the issue and implications about death resulting from sin much better than I did.
Science that is based on the current observation of processes is only valid when Scientists place their faith in Uniformitarianism. Therefore Old Earth Geology is as much faith based as Young Earth beliefs.
I will believe what the Bible tells me over the capriciousness of man.
Science used to tell us dinosaur juice (oil) took millions of years to form. Now they say they can do it in hours. How many times has science backtracked on itself? How many times has science taught us the 'fact' that this relic or these bones were 'the missing link', only to years later say oops no it wasn't? I take science with a grain of salt - but God I take literally.
In order to have a "second Adam" - Jesus Christ, you have to have a "first Adam." That means a young earth, because Adam and Eve would have been lost in the millennia and the records would be inaccurate.
"Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. [SUP]46 [/SUP]But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. [SUP]47 [/SUP]The first man was from the earth, a man of dust;the second man is from heaven." 1 Cor. 15:45-47 ESV
I really like the way the Message puts this:
"We follow this sequence in Scripture: The First Adam received life, the Last Adam is a life-giving Spirit. Physical life comes first, then spiritual—a firm base shaped from the earth, a final completion coming out of heaven. The First Man was made out of earth, and people since then are earthy; the Second Man was made out of heaven, and people now can be heavenly. In the same way that we’ve worked from our earthy origins, let’s embrace our heavenly ends." 1 Cor. 15:45-49
I have lots of scientific reasons I also believe in a young earth, created by God in 7 days, but I will stick to the Bible here.
"Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. [SUP]46 [/SUP]But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. [SUP]47 [/SUP]The first man was from the earth, a man of dust;the second man is from heaven." 1 Cor. 15:45-47 ESV
I really like the way the Message puts this:
"We follow this sequence in Scripture: The First Adam received life, the Last Adam is a life-giving Spirit. Physical life comes first, then spiritual—a firm base shaped from the earth, a final completion coming out of heaven. The First Man was made out of earth, and people since then are earthy; the Second Man was made out of heaven, and people now can be heavenly. In the same way that we’ve worked from our earthy origins, let’s embrace our heavenly ends." 1 Cor. 15:45-49
I have lots of scientific reasons I also believe in a young earth, created by God in 7 days, but I will stick to the Bible here.
I know where you are coming from. I took Geology classes in college. I went to road cuts and collected fossils and observed what appeared to be the results of geological processes. Just keep in mind that the geologic column exists nowhere on earth. In fact, there are many inconsistencies in the aging process.
Also, science has one major flaw. They eliminate the supernatural before they even begin observation. If all evidences of supernatural effects are ignored and made to fit into naturalistic processes, and the supernatural does exist, which I believe He does (God), then is science a real search for knowledge?
You made a good point about Christians debating about biblical issues. That is why I left it open for someone to illustrate a hermeneutical interpretation of Genesis 1-3 that is consistent throughout the biblical record, that makes an old Earth possible. In my opinion, all of the current old age earth theories interpret the language in Genesis inconsistently from the way that the rest of the Bible is interpreted, implying a bias.
Also, science has one major flaw. They eliminate the supernatural before they even begin observation. If all evidences of supernatural effects are ignored and made to fit into naturalistic processes, and the supernatural does exist, which I believe He does (God), then is science a real search for knowledge?
You made a good point about Christians debating about biblical issues. That is why I left it open for someone to illustrate a hermeneutical interpretation of Genesis 1-3 that is consistent throughout the biblical record, that makes an old Earth possible. In my opinion, all of the current old age earth theories interpret the language in Genesis inconsistently from the way that the rest of the Bible is interpreted, implying a bias.
W
This is actually how science works . it is always reviewing it beliefs,( a good thing ). I don't think old or new puts god ,its creator at risk. but our Interpretations are viewed by unbelievers and for there sake and ours be considered with the best information available. As far as Ken Ham I have always had a check in my spirit about him. Maybe in the crowd he hangs out with, or the the whole commercialization of the word of God or some thing. I don't think we want to be known as those that believe the earth is the center of all and the sun orbits the earth ,an old catholic belief that removed far to many heads. God sure is some designer though. I think time is really a minor issue in Gods purpose ,at least much less than ours which seem to fleet away so fast. e=Either way God is still awesome. Amen
We don't really know how long it was from the time God told Adam and Eve to go forth and multiply, and the time they decided to eat the fruit of the tree. That could have been eons, providing the years required for an old earth option. My understanding is that we don't know how old the earth was prior to the fall, but post fall we are definitely in new earth territory.
My observation of scientific theory leads me to concluded that scientists are often wildly guessing but making out they really know. This is nothing new, it used to be established fact that swallows would hibernate in mud and even dive down into the bottom of lakes and bury themsleves in the mud to see the winter out. Therefore with new scientific fields the guess work and conclusions we are told as "fact" could well end up going the same way as the swallows hibernating in mud at bottom of lakes.
R
the bible says adam had lived 130 years when his son seth was born...
so we -can- limit how long adam and eve were in the garden...less than 130 years...and probably no more than 100 years considering the time it took for cain and abel to grow up and become established farmers and shepherds before seth was born...
in any case the theory that adam and eve lived for billions of years in the garden of eden contradicts the same 'science' that it is trying to reconcile with the bible...no paleontologist is going to tell you that humans and birds and fruit trees go back 4.6 billion years...
all you get when you try to cram the billions of years required by secular 'science' into the bible is a third mythology that contradicts both...
so we -can- limit how long adam and eve were in the garden...less than 130 years...and probably no more than 100 years considering the time it took for cain and abel to grow up and become established farmers and shepherds before seth was born...
in any case the theory that adam and eve lived for billions of years in the garden of eden contradicts the same 'science' that it is trying to reconcile with the bible...no paleontologist is going to tell you that humans and birds and fruit trees go back 4.6 billion years...
all you get when you try to cram the billions of years required by secular 'science' into the bible is a third mythology that contradicts both...
That's not true at all. The Jewish day was only counted from sun up until sun down. Darkness happened then the next day began. The 24-hour day was an aspect of the Greek calendar which was not established until WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY later. You cannot hold God to man's standards of time when God created time. What is time to God?