-
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.
Just waiting for some examples of why you feel that the day-age creation model is not viable.
T
Tintin
Guest
Bowman, here are just some:
There was no death before The Fall, because death is a consequence of sin.
2 Peter 3:8 is not evidence for the Day-Age theory. It compares one day with the Lord as being like a thousand years and a thousand years being like one day. It's a simile.
Yom = a 24-hour period.
The context demands a 24-hour day. The early passages distinguish between days, years and seasons.
Symbiosis requires a 24-hour day.
The survival of plants and animals require a 24-hour day.
The unanimous testimony of rabbis in agreeing on a 24-hour period for each day.
Church fathers, save for Origen and Clement of Alexandria also agreed upon a 24-hour period. The two mentioned allegorized the whole Bible to different extents.
There was no death before The Fall, because death is a consequence of sin.
2 Peter 3:8 is not evidence for the Day-Age theory. It compares one day with the Lord as being like a thousand years and a thousand years being like one day. It's a simile.
Yom = a 24-hour period.
The context demands a 24-hour day. The early passages distinguish between days, years and seasons.
Symbiosis requires a 24-hour day.
The survival of plants and animals require a 24-hour day.
The unanimous testimony of rabbis in agreeing on a 24-hour period for each day.
Church fathers, save for Origen and Clement of Alexandria also agreed upon a 24-hour period. The two mentioned allegorized the whole Bible to different extents.
B
BananaPie
Guest
There exists other volcanos, other rocks, and other examples of erroneous "dating." God doesn't make mistakes; only humans do. That was the "overwhelming" point.
Brother......you don't even know what 'day-age' refers to...all you know is that you are against it...
Plants died when Adam & Eve ate.
This verse is not even part of the 'day-age' creation model to begin with...come on....
The lexicons show many other meanings.
No.
Show us...
No.
Do you even know what the term means...?
No.
No.
Many early people believed in long periods of time....so what?
Nothing that you mentioned detracts from the day-age model being viable.
Plants died when Adam & Eve ate.
This verse is not even part of the 'day-age' creation model to begin with...come on....
The lexicons show many other meanings.
No.
Show us...
No.
Do you even know what the term means...?
No.
No.
Many early people believed in long periods of time....so what?
Nothing that you mentioned detracts from the day-age model being viable.
D
danschance
Guest
I have wondered about Nye's proclivities....It's late, and I misread the title as "Bill Nye dates Ken Ham".
Wrong Bowman!
An Overview of Day-Age's Errors
by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. * Chair of the Department of Astro/Geophysics.
Many Bible scholars today are buying into the day-age theory of origins. They seem to believe that their biblical views must conform to their mental image of how the world functions today and must be confirmed by members of the non-Christian world, whose minds are darkened (Ephesians 4:17-19).
The basis of the day-age interpretation of long ages rests on a flawed understanding of the use of the word yom in Genesis 1 and 2. Here, I will discuss briefly the theory's five main errors.
A Day Is a Day
The claim that yom is a long but finite time period is based on the assertion that yommeans "age" in Genesis 2:4. However, in the Hebrew Old Testament yom normally means either a 24-hour day, or the daylight portion of a 24-hour day ("day" as distinct from "night"). It may occasionally be used for an indefinite time (e.g., "days of the judges"), but never as a definite long period of time with a specific beginning and ending.
It is not used even in this indefinite sense except when the context clearly indicates that the literal meaning is not intended. When ordinals or the phrase "evening and morning" are connected with yom, it always means a solar day. The context of the six days of creation account in Genesis 1 precludes any meaning of indefinite time.
God Rested
Day-agers say that since "morning and evening" are not listed for the seventh day, the sabbath must still be continuing. If it has continued for thousands--maybe millions--of years, it can't be a solar day. However, Scripture does not say, "He is resting on the seventh day," but, rather, "He rested on the seventh day" (Genesis 2:2).
Though His work of creation was finished, He very soon undertook the great work of redemption (John 4:34; 5:17; etc.). That work was finished (John 17:4) when the Son of God on the cross shouted the mighty cry of victory: "It is finished!" The six days of creation and the seventh day of rest were a unique set of solar days at the beginning of earth history.
A Thousand-Year Day
Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 state that a day is like a thousand years to God. This is used by some to suggest that yom in Genesis 1 may be thousands, millions, or even billions of years long. This phrase actually depicts God's view of time, which He created on the first day of creation, along with mass and space. Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth." A better translation of this verse would be, "The transcendent, omnipotent Godhead created (from nothing) mass, space, and time."
The very name for God is I AM THAT I AM (Exodus 3:14). God exists simultaneously in the past, present, and future. He is outside of time. The purpose of this phrase in Psalm 90 and 2 Peter is not as a definition of yom, but as a characterization of God.
Normal Processes Did Not Apply
Some argue that the maturing of plants would take much longer than a day, therefore the third day couldn't have been 24 hours. This argument shows an extreme lack of appreciation for what God did during creation. He created everything from nothing by His word. Why would it not be possible for God to create mature plants, animals, and man on the various days of creation?
God was not bound by normal processes during the creation events. In fact, creation was a miracle of the first magnitude. God spoke and the universe came into existence. God spoke and mature plants and animals were formed. God spoke and mankind was created. This argument is not worthy of dispute.
Your God is Too Small
The claim that the events that took place on the sixth day of creation could not have occurred within a 24-hour solar day are refuted by arguments similar to those given above for the fourth error. Day-agers' view of God is too small.
An Overview of Day-Age's Errors
Sorry I wasn't around earlier to refute your nonsense. I had to spend some time with my family!
An Overview of Day-Age's Errors
by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. * Chair of the Department of Astro/Geophysics.
Many Bible scholars today are buying into the day-age theory of origins. They seem to believe that their biblical views must conform to their mental image of how the world functions today and must be confirmed by members of the non-Christian world, whose minds are darkened (Ephesians 4:17-19).
The basis of the day-age interpretation of long ages rests on a flawed understanding of the use of the word yom in Genesis 1 and 2. Here, I will discuss briefly the theory's five main errors.
A Day Is a Day
The claim that yom is a long but finite time period is based on the assertion that yommeans "age" in Genesis 2:4. However, in the Hebrew Old Testament yom normally means either a 24-hour day, or the daylight portion of a 24-hour day ("day" as distinct from "night"). It may occasionally be used for an indefinite time (e.g., "days of the judges"), but never as a definite long period of time with a specific beginning and ending.
It is not used even in this indefinite sense except when the context clearly indicates that the literal meaning is not intended. When ordinals or the phrase "evening and morning" are connected with yom, it always means a solar day. The context of the six days of creation account in Genesis 1 precludes any meaning of indefinite time.
God Rested
Day-agers say that since "morning and evening" are not listed for the seventh day, the sabbath must still be continuing. If it has continued for thousands--maybe millions--of years, it can't be a solar day. However, Scripture does not say, "He is resting on the seventh day," but, rather, "He rested on the seventh day" (Genesis 2:2).
Though His work of creation was finished, He very soon undertook the great work of redemption (John 4:34; 5:17; etc.). That work was finished (John 17:4) when the Son of God on the cross shouted the mighty cry of victory: "It is finished!" The six days of creation and the seventh day of rest were a unique set of solar days at the beginning of earth history.
A Thousand-Year Day
Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 state that a day is like a thousand years to God. This is used by some to suggest that yom in Genesis 1 may be thousands, millions, or even billions of years long. This phrase actually depicts God's view of time, which He created on the first day of creation, along with mass and space. Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth." A better translation of this verse would be, "The transcendent, omnipotent Godhead created (from nothing) mass, space, and time."
The very name for God is I AM THAT I AM (Exodus 3:14). God exists simultaneously in the past, present, and future. He is outside of time. The purpose of this phrase in Psalm 90 and 2 Peter is not as a definition of yom, but as a characterization of God.
Normal Processes Did Not Apply
Some argue that the maturing of plants would take much longer than a day, therefore the third day couldn't have been 24 hours. This argument shows an extreme lack of appreciation for what God did during creation. He created everything from nothing by His word. Why would it not be possible for God to create mature plants, animals, and man on the various days of creation?
God was not bound by normal processes during the creation events. In fact, creation was a miracle of the first magnitude. God spoke and the universe came into existence. God spoke and mature plants and animals were formed. God spoke and mankind was created. This argument is not worthy of dispute.
Your God is Too Small
The claim that the events that took place on the sixth day of creation could not have occurred within a 24-hour solar day are refuted by arguments similar to those given above for the fourth error. Day-agers' view of God is too small.
An Overview of Day-Age's Errors
Sorry I wasn't around earlier to refute your nonsense. I had to spend some time with my family!
T
Tintin
Guest
Good link, Angela!
Bowman, if your Day-Age theory proposes otherwise, please link to a specific explanation or describe it in your own words so we know where you're coming from. Because where I'm coming from, that's the only form of the Day-Age theory of which I know. Thanks.
Bowman, if your Day-Age theory proposes otherwise, please link to a specific explanation or describe it in your own words so we know where you're coming from. Because where I'm coming from, that's the only form of the Day-Age theory of which I know. Thanks.
D
danschance
Guest
I bet Nye wanted the public to see Ham as a buffoon with his 6 day creation to discredit him and creationism.
I really don't understand how people can willingly ignore solid evidence. Please, look at this, it has references to reputable scientists, and a few of the 'points' the young Earth advocates actually make are decimated.
How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Hovind's 'Proofs' (continued)
How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Hovind's 'Proofs' (continued)
Last night Ken Ham's debate was historical. Check this out: the debate had more viewers than the Super Bowl this weekend. The debate had more viewers than the President's speech last week.
...and 2,000-something years later, the Lord Jesus Christ is still making headlines winning minds for God. Like sweet!
Christian or Atheist... I suppose that's a point that can't be contested lol
Here is yet ANOTHER "theory" to explain how there is no God who created the Universe. Honestly, the garbage you have to believe with these "enlightened" scientists require MUCH more faith than I can muster!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-theory-universe-THAWED-long-deep-freeze.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-theory-universe-THAWED-long-deep-freeze.html
Ken put fourth all of the best claims that he could, he has every creation aid he can possibly get, serious money was put behind this debate or science fair if you will. If the proof was out there that god created the universe he would have displayed it.
Nothing we find supports a young earth, nothing we find supports that a god created the universe, especially in the way that the bible depicts.
Not one example of modern mammalian life co existing with early organisms or dinosaurs, no proof for the super massive global flood.
On top of all of that no claims for supernatural beings or ghosts, evil spirits (what is a spirit?) no proof for any sort of magic, telepathic powers within humans, people living a super long time, none of it.
Nothing we find supports a young earth, nothing we find supports that a god created the universe, especially in the way that the bible depicts.
Not one example of modern mammalian life co existing with early organisms or dinosaurs, no proof for the super massive global flood.
On top of all of that no claims for supernatural beings or ghosts, evil spirits (what is a spirit?) no proof for any sort of magic, telepathic powers within humans, people living a super long time, none of it.
This debate accomplished little or nothing. All it did was focus attention on evolution and young earth arguments only. Neither are correct. The Achilles heal of evolution is the fact that life has never originated out of nonlife, and that nonlife (matter) could not have created itself out of nothing. Young people easily recognize this. But they also recognize the problems with an earth, and a universe created only 6000 years ago. This is the Achilles heel of the Ken Ham-young earth interpretation. Millions of young people, thinking that the Bible requires them to believe that which they see no evidence for---dismiss scripture as a myth. The Bible does not require us to believe that millions of dinosaurs were born, lived and died, since Adam was created about 6000 years ago. A person (scientists included) will think there is evidence for this only if they are first convinced that Adam was the first human. If this were true where did Cain get his wife? No, scripture does not tell us he married a sister. Only if one needs another error to cover the first (i.e., the idea that Adam was the first human) will they read this sister idea into the text. And who, if Adam was the first human, were those who Cain feared "...shall slay me" (Gen. 4:14) when he was driven into their land? A close reading of Genesis 4 will reveal six or more references to pre Adamic man. Yes, Genesis 1:1 does say "...in the beginning God created...." And we do know that what He created was out---of nothing. But the Bible does not require us to believe that it all happened a mere 6000 years ago. So please, do not read this Ken Ham type dogmatism into the text. The best way to introduce creation to young people is Intelligent Design.