Young Earth creationism

  • 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.
ATH1 said:
amen KJV. PPL say most all wars have been because of religion, and they are right. It is going to culminate just like the bible says in armageddon. I have tried to connect Jesus return (I know we cannot when He comes, but we can know when its near)
I pondered over a land contract God tells us farmers made when they sold land. after the 49th Jubilee, the original farmer received the land back!
I couldn't figure out why that was important to show in the bible. I have come up with that is when Jesus will return to claim the earth back. I wonder if God didn't "sell" the land to Lucifer at some time in the past and has to wait until the contract is up to reclaim it. The bible does say that satan is the prince of the earth, and satan told Jesus he would give him "all of this) earth to Jesus IF He would worship satan. We do belong to satan by default, because We have to make a conscious decision to accept God or we will not go back to Heaven.

I think the 50th Jubilee is getting very close.

humbly...allan
Click to expand...
The land thing is in the story of Ruth. Boaz took Ruth to be his wife and restored the land to Naomi. The timing's not there, but it's a very neat and prophetic story.
 
Bowman said:
Indeed...its an 'interpretation' required only by YEC's in order to make General Revelation jive with Special Revelation.

Again...OEC's don't have the need for invention.
Click to expand...

You have again used the straw man approach. Please, step up your game!

You seem to be defending old-earth creation. If that is the case, then defend it by asserting its merits, not by attacking an alternate view which no-one has directly espoused here (y-e-c, as such).
 
Bowman, it's absolutely OEC's who have the need for invention. I'm not sure why you only come out of the woodwork when these origins-related topics are brought up.
 
ATH1 said:
what is a strawman's approach?
Click to expand...

A strawman approach, or argument, is a tactic often described as a logical fallacy. It is the practice of presenting a simplified and often inaccurate summary of an opponent's views, then attacking that summary and concluding that you have thereby won the argument. The problem with it is that the presenter usually does not accurately represent the opponent's views, so what he is attacking is actually a "straw-man", not the actual thing itself.

Bowman used it twice in this thread, the same way. He set up young-earth creationists as the opponent, characterized their views negatively, summarized them inaccurately, then attacked his summary as though it accurately represented the views of y-e-c'ers. And it appears that he believes he has adequately refuted their beliefs, which he hasn't.
 
Dino246 said:
A strawman approach, or argument, is a tactic often described as a logical fallacy. It is the practice of presenting a simplified and often inaccurate summary of an opponent's views, then attacking that summary and concluding that you have thereby won the argument. The problem with it is that the presenter usually does not accurately represent the opponent's views, so what he is attacking is actually a "straw-man", not the actual thing itself.

Bowman used it twice in this thread, the same way. He set up young-earth creationists as the opponent, characterized their views negatively, summarized them inaccurately, then attacked his summary as though it accurately represented the views of y-e-c'ers. And it appears that he believes he has adequately refuted their beliefs, which he hasn't.
Click to expand...

That's his shtick, it's all he knows.
 
The reality of the young earth is how we live in it per say each moment.. every day is a "new day" in the Lord.
 
It was stated earlier that God's creation was perfect in genesis. I don't find that to be true. Good but not perfect as the text says.
 
pottersclay said:
It was stated earlier that God's creation was perfect in genesis. I don't find that to be true. Good but not perfect as the text says.
Click to expand...

*Deuteronomy 32:4 KJV*
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.



The Bible says His work is perfect yet you say His work is not perfect?
 
Laodicea said:
*Deuteronomy 32:4 KJV*
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.



The Bible says His work is perfect yet you say His work is not perfect?
Click to expand...


of course you are both wrong - the Bible says the world was very good[perfect] - it is not now perfect after the Fall far from it in fact - wincam
 
tintin come on very good does not mean perfect if it were so then Adam would not have sinned.
 
It does not matter if the Earth is Billions of years old or 6000 years old!

What matters is have you accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior!

This is all that counts, not how old the Earth is.
 
[SUP]If God didn't make the age of the earth an issue then why do we?





TITUS 3:9-11
9 [/SUP]But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. [SUP]10 [/SUP]Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, [SUP]11 [/SUP]knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.
 
pottersclay said:
tintin come on very good does not mean perfect if it were so then Adam would not have sinned.
Click to expand...


as the song goes everything was created beautiful/perfect and complete in it own way - so a perfect man is close to God but not perfect God - Adam was the son of God[Lk.3:38] but was not God as the second Adam as the son of God was God - nor was Eve a sinless immaculate conception - wincam
 
Roberth said:
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters." Gen 1:1

When was "in the beginning", 6000 years ago?

I do not know, but what I do know is that God called life into existence on a "formless and void" earth. The earth probably looked much like our Mars.

How long it was there before God began creating life on it the Bible does not state. It just says that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

However, once God started creating that process took 6 literal days according to the Genesis account.
Click to expand...

That's one way to look at it

Another way to look at it was in its original state, it was created in a formless and void state. (ie on day 1 of creation)



 
Tintin said:
Bowman, it's absolutely OEC's who have the need for invention. I'm not sure why you only come out of the woodwork when these origins-related topics are brought up.
Click to expand...

that's usually why I stay away from them, Seems like all it does it get a few people to me out with their fists to try to force feed others to believe what they do.
 
pottersclay said:
tintin come on very good does not mean perfect if it were so then Adam would not have sinned.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense.

Adam had free will. Why could he not sin if everything was perfect? That would not stop him, WHy did Satan sin and take 1/3 of the heavenly host with him, are you saying heaven was not perfect?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back