Young Earth Creation. Does it matter what you believe?

[RachelBibleStudent]

Who do you follow? I like Ken Ham as well.

well i don't 'follow' any particular young earth creation apologist...i follow christ...and other christians including both young and old earth creationists follow him along with me...

but if you are just wondering who i regard as the best young earth creation apologist today...my favorite is dr. andrew snelling from answers in genesis...

 

[Joshua_Generation]

well i don't 'follow' any particular young earth creation apologist...i follow christ...and other christians including both young and old earth creationists follow him along with me...

but if you are just wondering who i regard as the best young earth creation apologist today...my favorite is dr. andrew snelling from answers in genesis...

thanks, we agree.

 

[atwhatcost]

no, at the poles there is dark for about 6 months, and light for about 6 months at a time.
there's actually twilight for months, because the sun is just below the horizon, so not absolute dark, but still, it's quite literally dark at the north pole from early october to early march, so if you measure "night and day" by the sun, on some parts of the earth you get something quite different than a 24-hour period.



as far as how much light vs. how much dark you get, it's always depended on the season and where you are on earth, as long as the earth's axis has been tilted relative to its orbital plane. here's a handy chart!

View attachment 121340 ​
​

and actually, the moon's been slowing down the earth's rotation since it's been there, measurably. the period from one day to the next gets about 2 milliseconds longer every 100 years because of tidal friction, and other inertial changes on the earth make a rotational period vary from "day" to "day" -- all this has been measured and can be demonstrated -- check out this wiki-page for a semi-technical overview of that phenomenon

ΔT​

so days aren't constant as we think they are, not even in the Bible - remember how the day was lengthened when Joshua asked? so that Israel's enemies could be destroyed? not 24 earth-hours there, not that "day"
and the first time in the Bible we hear God Himself say the word "day" to a human -- He tells Adam & Eve that if they eat of the forbidden fruit, they will die "in the day they eat of it" -- but Adam lived for hundreds of years after he ate. of course God cannot lie, so we immediately start wondering what the right definition of "die" and of "day" is here -- we're not strangers to words having allegorical meanings in the scripture.
i just don't see the need for "yom" to mean a 24-hour cycle in Genesis 1 in the first place, especially if i'm not going to accept it as one in Genesis 2 ! and if i stick to 24-hours in Genesis 2, then i have to change my definition of "die" -- so either way, we're not being as literal as we make ourselves out to be, haha.

All that, and yet...

What about this?

Honestly, a basic concept of writing -- the first time you use a new word define it. He did. So, if he changed the definition, then he changed.

(Hey, if I can't discuss astronomy with authority -- and twilight isn't dark -- I can discuss writing and semantics pretty well. lol)

 

[atwhatcost]

I think that the 950 years are those spent outside of Eden, when they were thrown out they become bound to this earth as humans are today, the concept of age in an environment which lasts for eternity has no meaning. we only age things as we are mortal and die, age will have no meaning and be irrelevant when we all live for eternity.

So, suddenly those "days" didn't mean days again when they were in the garden? Stretching. Really streeeeeeeeetching to make it say what you want it to say.

 

[atwhatcost]

i'm sure there are more than two ways to comprehend it.
here's a second - that before the mean-free-path of an electron was greater than a planck length, there could be no such thing as light. this was evening. then He said "let there be light" and the universe inflated - and there was light. this was the first morning. then He separated the light from the darkness, space where there were photons and space where there was not, and called one Day and the other Night. this happened on the first yom.

on the second yom He cooled and expanded the superpressurized, superenergetic, superheated superfluid substance of the universe some more, which was as "waters" for lack of any better Aramaic word, to the point that it could exist as what we call 'ordinary matter' like atoms, and then further like gas and liquid. He separated these according to their kinds, into "waters above" called the heavens, and "waters below" and set gravity to work, so that there began to be such a thing called "up" and "down" and "above" and "below" -- and photons continued on their paths, and there was light and dark, evening and morning according to His cosmic measure, the second yom.

then he coalesced the planets, making solid things. He called this "Earth" - especially our planet. He put plant life on it and pooled up some of the gasses around it into liquid seas. He set it spinning so the photons hitting it weren't constant - so there was evening and morning. there was the third yom.

then we finally started to feel at home, when He placed us in our place with a sun and a moon, that we've been using together with our relative position to them ever since to measure a wibbly-wobbly thing called "time" -- and we had a thing to call evening on the earth, and a thing to call morning on the earth, and we finally had something proper to call a "day" -- that was the 4th yom.

the simplicity is that you can understand it from your place on your planet in this universe, wherever you find yourself.
the sublime thing is that even as your knowledge increases, it's still true.

JMHO.

So, really the meaning of day changed all together on the fourth day? Why did God bother using the word before that? Why not wait until it happened -- the fourth day?

 

[atwhatcost]

i don't want to get in any fights either.
i only started posting in here because the old-earth paradigm doesn't get aired much in Christian circles, and i don't want people to doubt their faith because they doubt a young earth.
i'm not dogmatic about it - i got opinions and musings, that's all, and i have too much respect for the faith of sisters like you, Angela, to let this become something that divides us.

maybe i should stop; it's probably just stirring up a pot that would be better off being left to itself!

Just so you know, you're not irking me. This is one of those things that endlessly fascinates me. The only difference is you take it astronomically, and I'm more into fossil records and communications.

 

[atwhatcost]

The Hebrew never states that the sun and moon were made on 'Day Four'.

As we both know, that would be quite impossible to have our sun created after the earth.

Ummm, no. Really the greater light and less light. What else but sun and moon?

Gens. 1:14-19

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons,[f] and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

And, right. Light came the first day. You can't change the word because it makes you scratch your head. lol

 

[atwhatcost]

DC, I am not directing this towards you, just so you know. It would seem you have a strong opinion on everything, but not this?

What you do believe about creation does affect your eternal salvation in Christ.

I believe many Christians who support the GAP Theory and Theistic Evolution are taking the broad road and if they believe these things are not really saved.

The modern day false prophets wear lab coats.

Nah, they're my doctors. Really. lol

There are YE palentologists in lab coats too. One of them actually convinced the evolutionists that not all dinos were cold blooded.

 

[atwhatcost]

Adam's account is a chrono-genealogy. Jesus' is a genealogy. But you're right about them not being in the garden of Eden for long. 100,000 years is ridiculous, considering God told them to be fruitful and to multiply. So, at most, they were in the garden for several weeks. As for their ages. Adam and Eve's years began when God created them man and woman. Adam lived to ripe-old age of 930, not 930 + 100,000 years or whatever.

Ah, man! I made Adam live for a whole 20 years longer than he did too. Poor Adam and Eve. I'm always messing them up -- first when they started having kids, and now making them grow older then they did. lol

(Seriously, just too lazy to look up exact ages sometimes. And then forgetting when someone gives me the info.)

 

[atwhatcost]

Here is one for you to chew on, When he created light and darkness, was it at that time he created Jesus and Lucifer?

Really? You think God created Jesus? Jesus is God. How could God create himself?

And Lucifer? So the bad angels were kicked out of heaven at earth's creation? Did they have a thing against God creating time and space? Maybe they did't like soil. Ah! I bet it was mosquitoes and slugs that did them in. Maybe lima beans. (Sorry. Don't take this personally. I'm having fun figuring out what demons have against earth. lol) I bet it was New Jersey. It's always New Jersey. lol

 

[atwhatcost]

well actually what you insinuate here is nearly as bad as what you are claiming young earth creationists do...

namely you insinuate here that people who don't believe as you do are not 'accepting the evidence of their own eyes'...you are basically asserting that anyone who doesn't believe in an old earth is a science denialist...

Not really. I feel no condemnation from posthuman simply for not agreeing with me, especially since he out and out said he just gets into this.

You might be reading too much into what he said, especially since he's not subtle.

 

[celib]

I see alot of talk about Dr. Kent Hovind. I have noticed that the people who say he's a fraud say it because of his stand on Creation not because he stood up to the IRS. I am set to defend the gospel. I truly believe that the world is less then 6,000 years old and that is what the Bible clearly teaches, imo. Comments?

Actually the Bible does not teach the earth is only 6,000 years old, 2Pe.3:5-6 the earth that then was [first world age] was destroyed during satan's rebellion, Jer.4:19-27, one day with the Lord is a thousand year for us 2Pe.3:8.

The creation in Gen. is the recreation after the first world age was destroyed, in Gen.1:28 God told man to replenish the earth which means it was ounce was populated, also the proper translation in Gen.1:2 is the earth became void, not was void.

The recreation took 6 days, that's 6 thousand years for us and he rested on the seventh day, that's 7 thousand years and Adam was formed on the eight day and that's 6 thousand years ago so the second world age is about 14 thousand years old, but the earth itself was created millions of years ago. God bless

 

[atwhatcost]

jesus was not created...

but i do believe that the first day is the most likely day for God to have created the angels...

Didn't you just say something about "theories that flagrantly don't make sense?" Seriously? What makes you think angels were created the same day earth was?

 

[atwhatcost]

Actually the Bible does not teach the earth is only 6,000 years old, 2Pe.3:5-6 the earth that then was [first world age] was destroyed during satan's rebellion, Jer.4:19-27, one day with the Lord is a thousand year for us 2Pe.3:8.

The creation in Gen. is the recreation after the first world age was destroyed, in Gen.1:28 God told man to replenish the earth which means it was ounce was populated, also the proper translation in Gen.1:2 is the earth became void, not was void.

The recreation took 6 days, that's 6 thousand years for us and he rested on the seventh day, that's 7 thousand years and Adam was formed on the eight day and that's 6 thousand years ago so the second world age is about 14 thousand years old, but the earth itself was created millions of years ago. God bless

A gapper? Wow! I haven't seen your kind in 20 years. I thought gappers died out or came up with a different plan by now.

 

[Bowman]

Run from it...

i agree...which is why i think it is a problem when old earth creationists promote theories that include so many both blatant and hidden but nearly always ignored inconsistencies with scripture and science and even internal contradictions that they are at serious risk of being accused of egregious intellectual dishonesty...

You disagreed before....and you never provided an example of the alleged 'inconsistencies'.

Guess you felt it was time to make the same meritless assertion again...

it is like the sales pitch for old earth creationism seems to be...'if you think a 6,000 year old earth is just too out there...but you are willing to buy into theories that flagrantly don't make sense...then old earth creationism is for you!'

OEC is already a fact for Posthuman, Jack, myself, and other like minded Christians...someday you will come to see the light...

 

[Bowman]

Ummm, no.

Yes.

Really the greater light and less light. What else but sun and moon?

Now, you are getting it...

Gens. 1:14-19


And, right. Light came the first day. You can't change the word because it makes you scratch your head. lol

The Sun and the Moon were created in Gen 1.1.

 

[Tintin]

well i don't 'follow' any particular young earth creation apologist...i follow christ...and other christians including both young and old earth creationists follow him along with me...

but if you are just wondering who i regard as the best young earth creation apologist today...my favorite is dr. andrew snelling from answers in genesis...

I don't believe I have any one favourite biblical creationist apologist, so much as I prefer those who do the best job and are interesting. Jonathan Sarfati is brilliant, but some of his stuff goes over my head. So yeah, no one favourite for me.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Didn't you just say something about "theories that flagrantly don't make sense?" Seriously? What makes you think angels were created the same day earth was?

well it seems that everything that needed to be made was created during those six days of creation week...see exodus 20:11...that would seem to include the angels...

then see job 38:4-7 which indicates the presence of the angels when the earth's foundations were being laid...if the angels were already there at that time then they must have been created either on day one or day two...depending on what events of creation week you identify with the laying of the earth's foundations...

within that two day possible timeframe implied by scripture i lean towards the first day as the day when the angels were created...due to the association between angels and light...

 

[Tintin]

well it seems that everything that needed to be made was created during those six days of creation week...see exodus 20:11...that would seem to include the angels...

then see job 38:4-7 which indicates the presence of the angels when the earth's foundations were being laid...if the angels were already there at that time then they must have been created either on day one or day two...depending on what events of creation week you identify with the laying of the earth's foundations...

within that two day possible timeframe implied by scripture i lean towards the first day as the day when the angels were created...due to the association between angels and light...

Huh. Very interesting. That's quite possible. And then Satan was kicked from Heaven between the end of Creation and the Fall of Man.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Re: Run from it...

You disagreed before....and you never provided an example of the alleged 'inconsistencies'.

Guess you felt it was time to make the same meritless assertion again...

actually i did provide examples of the flaws in old earth creation models...but that other thread was quite cluttered so you might not have seen it...

in any case i copied a post of mine from that thread into this thread...go back to page three to read my criticisms of old earth models...