|
Author
|
Topic: old earth or new earth?
|
Lost
Advanced Member
Member # 343
|
posted
hey deut. i just read this article on aig regarding 2nd law and found it interesting
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/370.asp
and for the stuff you want to talk about let's get into fossils first. i'll post more later when i have time.
lost
--------------------
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. - Rev 22:17
Posts: 115 | From: Los Angeles/San Diego, CA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
art
unregistered
|
posted
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup2.gif) Caretaker
We have the same teacher-- The Holy Spirit!!
IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
Gap theory is merely the compromise by christians, with the erroneous conclusions of secular science.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-gaptheory-problems.html
If the fossil record was formed by "Lucifer's flood," then what did the global flood of Noah do? On this point the gap theorist is forced to conclude that Noah's flood left virtually no trace. To be consistent, the gap theorist would have to defend Noah's flood as a local event. Custance, one of the major proponents of the gap theory, did this. He even published a paper defending a local flood.[5]
Genesis, however, depicts Noah's flood as a judgment for man's sin (Genesis 6). Water flooded the earth for over a year (Genesis 6:17 and 7:19-24). Only eight people, and air-breathing, land-dwelling animals with them on the ark, survived. (Genesis 7:23).
Sadly, in relegating the fossil record to the supposed gap, "gappists" have removed the evidence for God's judgment on the violent pre-flood world in the graveyard of the flood. The fossils buried by the flood should warn us of God's judgment to come on sinful humans (2 Peter 3:2-14).
The gap theorist ignores the evidence for a young earth.
The true gap theorist also ignores evidence consistent with an age for the earth of less than 10,000 years. There is much evidence for this -- the decay and rapid reversals of the earth's magnetic field; the quantity of helium in the earth's atmosphere; the amount of salt in the oceans; the wind-up of spiral galaxies; and much more.[6]
The gap theory fails to accommodate standard uniformitarian geology with its long ages anyway.
Today's uniformitarian geologists allow for no worldwide flood of any kind -- the imaginary Lucifer's flood, or Noah's real flood. They also recognize no break between the supposed former created world and the current re-created world.
Most importantly, the gap theory undermines the gospel at its foundations.
By accepting an ancient age for the earth (based on the standard uniformitarian interpretation of the geologic column), gap theorists leave the evolutionary system intact (which by their own assumptions they oppose).
Even worse, they must also theorize that Romans 5:12 and Genesis 3:3 refer only to spiritual death. But this contradicts other Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15; Genesis 3:22-23). These passages tell us that Adam's sin led to physical death as well as spiritual death. In 1 Corinthians 15 the death of the last Adam (the Lord Jesus Christ) is compared with the death of the first Adam. Jesus suffered physical death for man's sin, because Adam, the first man, died physically because of sin. Genesis 3:22-23 tells us that if Adam and Eve could have partaken of the fruit of the Tree of Life, they would have lived forever, but God decreed that they should die physically because of their sin.
In placing on man the curse of physical death, God provided a way to redeem man through the person of His Son Jesus Christ,who suffered the curse of death on the cross for us. "He tasted death for every man" (Hebrews 2:9). By becoming the perfect sacrifice for our sin and rebellion, He conquered death. He took the penalty that should rightly have been ours at the hands of a righteous judge, and bore it in His own body on the cross. All who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior are received back to God to spend eternity with Him. That is the message of Christianity. To believe there was death before Adam's sin destroys the basis of the Christian message, because the Bible states that man's rebellious actions led to death and the corruption of the universe (Romans 8:19-22). Thus, the gap theory undermines the foundations of Christianity.
Genesis records a catastrophe that destroyed all organisms that had the "breath of life in them" except for those preserved in Noah's ark. Christ refers to Noah's flood in Matthew 24:37-39, and the apostle Peter writes that, just as there was once a global judgment of mankind by water, so there will be another worldwide judgment by fire (2 Peter 3).
It is more consistent with the whole framework of Scripture to attribute most fossils to Noah's flood than to resort to a strained interpretation of the fall of Satan[7] and a totally speculative catastrophe that contributes nothing to biblical understanding, or to science.
Moreover, advocating death before Adam sinned contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture that death came only after Adam sinned and made man's redemption necessary.....
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
God spoke, Moses wrote, a true account direct from Creation's source. The Word says that each of creation's days had a morning and evening, and they were six literal days. The Word says that all were created in their maturity. Secular science denys the supernatural, and relegates the evidence of worldwide cataclysm to eons of time rather than a single event with the evidence of worldwide death of all with the breath of life therein.
There can be no compromise and maintain ones' credibility as an advocte of God's Word.
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Waterdog
Advanced Member
Member # 24
|
posted
Hah! Wow, I never knew it had a name! Well, then my hubby and I are gap theorists, too. ![[Big Clap]](graemlins/clap2.gif) ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
--------------------
So let us go forth to Him outside the camp (Heb 13:11-14)
 
Posts: 374 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Squidward
New Member
Member # 774
|
posted
Hey, everybody! How ya doin'? May I put my two-cents-worth in?
I'm a Creationist, and I believe in the Old-Earth system. I also believe quite a bit of the Gap Theory--it can explain a lot about the differences between the world of long ago and today's world. (The best site I've found on the Gap Theory is [URL=http://www.kjvbible.org] Christian Geology Ministry.)
Most Christians today would vehemently disagree with me. I've even been accused of "diluting" the Word of God on another BB. But all that's OK. We all worship the same God, and Jesus is the Savior of all. We see through a glass darkly now, so we can't know the answers to very much. We just do the best we can, waiting for the day when He will give us the knowledge we seek.
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein
Posts: 5 | From: South Carolina | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
Thank you Drew that clears things up.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Caretaker
Advanced Member
Member # 36
|
posted
Isaiah 11:
1: And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
2: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
3: And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
4: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
5: And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
6: The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
7: And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8: And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
9: They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
10: And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
Genesis 1:
29: And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30: And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so .
31: And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
--------------------
A Servant of Christ,
Drew
1 Tim. 3:
16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..
Posts: 3978 | From: Council Grove, KS USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
quotei......there are philosophical problems with incorporating millions of years into the Biblical framework. for example, the Bible still states that adam first came about ~10,000 years ago. if evolution were true, then that means death was around for millions to billions of years prior to the fall which is when death came into existence (gen 3) which was ~130 years post-creation week (exact date not known). how can death exist beforehand when death is first introduced by man's freewill choice. death is not consistent with a creation that is 'very good' as declared by God (gen 1:31). this is a taste of the philosophical incongruities......end quote
No death until the Fall? I've heard this many times in my years in private school and church. Maybe a stupid question on my part, but I always thought about how carnivore animals ate because their meat-eating teeth would have made plant eating very difficult (or if spiders sucked food out of plants?) I've always wondered if God created meat eating animals before the fall, knowing that they would eat meat some day? Something I find myself thinking about. I remember my teacher telling me they all ate fruit, since that would keep the plants from dieing
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
Thanks for the links, I spent all day reading them. Honestly though some points made some sense, while many others dont. Anybody here want to go through with me one at a time? I tend to hyperfocus but I like to be organized. And I have a few gigs of memory to use up and a love of learning to pursue. It doesnt bother me if it takes months. but I need to follow along one step at a time. Anybody want to pick a topic? ( Example:radiometric dateing, geology, Grand canyon, Flood, c-14, fossils) My inquiring spirit wont rest until I can make sense of it all.) More links are helpful if its on topic.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
here some stuff from the
Answers in Genesis web site.....
answers16-Oct-2000
Another ‘Missing Link’ Takes Flight
In a case that smacks of the Piltdown Man forgery early last century, National Geographic magazine has admitted to having egg on its face due to an item it published in November, 1999. In a five-page article in the October, 2000 issue that reads like a good mystery story, author Lewis M. Simons reveals a world of intrigue, deception, pride and money in the trafficking and promoting of a so-called link proving that birds ‘evolved’ from dinosaurs. The article inadvertently demonstrates, if nothing else, the desperate desire of individuals to gain instant fame and fortune, and of the scientific community to grasp at any evolutionary straw that will bolster their already shaky house.
Find Christian answers to today’s increasing evolutionary attacks.
Creation Magazine
READ exclusive reports on how to deal with the latest evolu- tionary claims
ENJOY well-written articles by leading creationists, beautiful illustrations, cartoons & photo- graphy
NO paid advertising! Creation magazine is completely funded by your subscription
SHARE! Many people become Christians because a subscriber shared the information found in Creation magazine. Leave this magazine around or pass on after you have read for others to see!
EDUCATE your whole family with colorful and insightful articles, as well as our popular ‘Answers for Kids’ section. This resource is great for Home Schoolers!
More info/Purchase online
The ‘dino-bird’ in question was named Archaeo- raptor liaoningensis. A Chinese farmer dug up the fossil in two separate areas of a shale pit, pasted the pieces together and sold the resulting composite clandestinely through a middle man for fear of his life (due to Chinese laws against such sales). It ended up in a gem and mineral show in Tucson, Arizona, where it was bought for $80,000 by the director of a small dinosaur museum in Blanding, Utah.
What ‘stunned’ the purchaser, Stephen A. Czerkas, was that the fossil demonstrated not only feathering but also a beak lined with tiny teeth and a rigid, needle-like tail. To one with evolutionary presuppositions, that could only mean one thing: incontrovertible proof that dinosaurs evolved into birds. In his haste to hatch a golden egg for his struggling museum, Czerkas rushed to have the fossil validated through contacts in the scientific and publishing community, which included the scientific journal Nature, and National Geographic. While the former ended up rejecting the fossil as having not undergone enough testing and possibly being contrived, the latter, in a classic ‘I-thought-he-thought’ blame shifting pattern, managed to let the truth fall between the cracks despite persistent questions about the fossil’s authenticity, and went ahead with publishing the article.
Answers in Genesis was already aware that Archaeoraptor was a not a missing link even before the hoax was exposed — see Archaeoraptor: Phony ‘feathered’ fossil. Why? Although there were plenty of scientific problems, the bottom line is that we have a reliable eye-witness account that birds did not evolve from anything. They were birds when God created them, and they are still birds. See these links to Web articles we published earlier this year (below, as well as in note 4 of the previous article). The search for a missing link between birds and dinosaurs, like that between monkeys and man, is an exercise in evolutionary futility.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
Thank you Lost I will check it all out and get back with you. Peace and Happyness to you.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Lost
Advanced Member
Member # 343
|
posted
hey deut! yeah i'm a creationist. and i agree that you shouldn't be afraid to ask questions because our God is a God of truth. the only caveat is that when you ask a question diligently seek an answer. my lifetime verse is Jer 29:13 "And you will seek me and you will find me when you seek me with all your heart." i also like the verse that states something like "My people perish for a lack of knowledge." i don't know where the address of that verse is though. i also agree with you that if you were a Christian that believed in evolution that you wouldn't be going to hell for it. however, it does present philosophical incongruities that are irreconcilable between the two differing worldviews. also, if you can take the liberty to say that the opening of the Bible isn't true, then who is to say the rest is either. these are questions i had to ask myself (once an evolutionist), and it was a challenging time for me. i have background in the biological and chemical sciences and through all the evolutionary indoctrination it was hard for me to find the truth but www.answersingenesis.org is a wonderful website run by mostly ph.d. scientists that uphold the Word of God. and they're arguments are very logical and they reference the scientific literature. i encourage you to check them out. i personally don't use the 2nd law argument. i don't know enough about it to use so i don't. besides there are better and more credible arguments against evolution within the realms of chemistry, biology, and paleontology. there may or may not be good arguments in other fields, but since i do not have an adequate understanding of both sides of the story, then i am not able to truly comment. check out the website i posted cuz they have ph.d. geologists on staff and some articles presenting and defending the creationist position and providing a creationist explanation. also check out www.icr.org and read the impact articles and back to genesis articles. www.talkorigins.org is also a good website and i don't know about the rest. if you have any questions please post and i'll try to do some research and see if i find anything. i think it's vitally important to understand the scientific evidence for the creation of the world because then the rest of the Christian worldview falls into place. if God did not create the world, and the first human being, then adam's original sin has no bearing on the rest of humanity, and then that makes the cross of Christ of no effect. think about it. go to answers in genesis for more well-structured arguments. i'm just touching the surface. much love and God bless deut. may Jesus open your eyes during your quests.
lost
--------------------
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. - Rev 22:17
Posts: 115 | From: Los Angeles/San Diego, CA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
I dont know or understand micro-biology/ molecular/ chemical/ genetics, I've got a dozen or so text books on the subjects but cant seem to remember anything I read on it. I know geology (Im a fossil collector, in fact I am holding a metorite right now from China)
I am (was) a creationist but have been slowly pulled to the other direction because of a life long facination with the natural history. Its been a few years but getting back into it. I am refreshing myself with the topic, Mainly because I have unlimited, free sources of information on the subjects of Geology/paleotology/ Archeology/ Anthropology/ Natural History. I am no expert
but I collect as much data as I can. I dont care about proveing to anyone " I'm right and your wrong" I am a born again christian, but at the same time it doesnt bother me anymore if other christians think I am going to hell for heretical thinking science is as valid as faith. I love God. And God knows my heart. And I where there is ultimate Love there is Freedom ( freedom to inquire, freedom to question) and there is no Fear. My freedom from fear does not cancel out my faith.
Geology is a good place to start, because all the evidence of past events is right below my feet. I like to take things one step at a time because I recognise there is so much unintentional disinformation and mis-understanding on the topic.
Example: the claim that Evo violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics is a result of not understanding what the law is,
a complex closed-system ( such as our bodies ) will not break down to simple form as long as we keep eating energy from outside sources to maintain our complexity. This is called an open-system.
Personally, idea of Evo turns me off, but at the same time I cannot except this as proof that Evo is wrong simply because I want it to be wrong. That would be decieving myself because I am afraid of violating my own personal "comfort-zone".
I think the God induced mechanisms of Natural History should be universal, consistant, and Empirical. I doubt God is a practical joker or is "at war" with the physical laws that he created in the first place.
If God spoke, and the Universe was created, then Science is no less the study of Gods Word. In Science there is no 5000 opposeing doctrines as there are in the contradicting Bible based christian doctrines. Science/Math and its many fields is universal and consistent across all cultures. And when conflicts do arise within, science is not threatened by it, its motivated to study deeper and to determine why ( example classical physics vs. Quantum)
Anyway, I'll stop cause Im just blabbering on.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
Quan important point to keep in mind when dealing with the creation/evolution issue is that both theories are inherently religious and nonscientific. science is supposed to be repeatable, verifiable, and falsifiable, but neither evolution or creation meet these criteria. """ end quote """
Hello Lost,
ARe you a creationist?
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Lost
Advanced Member
Member # 343
|
posted
thanks for the kind words, but in retrospect i realized that my post didn't really answer the stated question. i got to eager to talk within my field that it seems the question is more related to geology and geological evolution than anything else. the aig web has tons of great info.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp
evidence for a young earth that comes to mind is that coal, which is supposedly to have been around for millions of years, still contains carbon-14 in it. this is astonishing to evolutionists since carbon-14 is not supposed to last for >50,000 years. also if the earth has been around for billions of years then the sea would contain much more salt than it currently does.
an important point to keep in mind when dealing with the creation/evolution issue is that both theories are inherently religious and nonscientific. science is supposed to be repeatable, verifiable, and falsifiable, but neither evolution or creation meet these criteria. these are both philosophies of history that try to explain what happened in the past and they are not scientific although the evolutionists will go to great pains to make you believe that their theory is scientific while ours is not. since we cannot repeat the past, we cannot know what really happened (although we have an eyewitness acount in gen). all we can do at this point in time is collect data about our universe, earth, animals, plants, and humans, and try to discern from these objective facts if they fit and corroborate one of these two theories.
for example, there are stratiagraphic layers of fossils in the earth. evolutionists will claim that these different layers represent millions of years in each layer and the fossils found there are representative of life that was around in that layer. and they say this corroborates their theory since they claim that cells became invertebrates became vertebrates (fish) became amphibians became mammals etc. through evolutionary processes and that this is the order of fossils found in the stratiagraphic layers. however, creationists also interpret these different stratiagraphic layers to have been laid down as sediment after noah's flood and the different organisms in the different layers are from various burials that occurred during this process. please look at websites posted for more in-depth info on this as geology is not one of my strong points either. i do know that the evolutionary prediction does have problems with it. namely, that the appearance of life occurs in the cambrian strata with members of different phyla (very different organisms) being present all at once without transitional forms leading up to them. there is also no evidence of intermediate forms in the pre-cambrian strata although they have found some fossil microorganisms. so what the evidence shows us is that life came on the scene and is highly diversified in the 'cambrian explosion' which is difficult for evolutionists to account for since it doesn't fit their theory. also there are no transitional forms going from invertebrates to vertebrates which is another problem.
i hope this better addresses what you are getting at. sorry for this shotgun approach to the topic i'll try to get more organized. i just have all this info in my head not systematized into a coherent argument but it'll get there. thanks for being patient.
lost
--------------------
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. - Rev 22:17
Posts: 115 | From: Los Angeles/San Diego, CA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
dckeys
Community Member
Member # 27
|
posted
Amen Lost! Great post!
--------------------
"The space between these earlobes is for rent"
Posts: 18 | From: Mt. Juliet Tennessee | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Lost
Advanced Member
Member # 343
|
posted
hey deut!! you always have wonderful questions. as far as the links that kindgo posted the best ones are www.answersingenesis.org and www.icr.org and i haven't really sifted through the rest. i have been accessing the prior two websites for a while.
the earth is young. specifically because God said so. as it is recorded in gen 1 so it is also recorded in ex 20:11. "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day."
there are philosophical problems with incorporating millions of years into the Biblical framework. for example, the Bible still states that adam first came about ~10,000 years ago. if evolution were true, then that means death was around for millions to billions of years prior to the fall which is when death came into existence (gen 3) which was ~130 years post-creation week (exact date not known). how can death exist beforehand when death is first introduced by man's freewill choice. death is not consistent with a creation that is 'very good' as declared by God (gen 1:31). this is a taste of the philosophical incongruities.
now for the scientific aspect this takes a bit of reading and research. for starters, chemical evolution (formation of first living cell from non-living material) cannot happen. through all the experiments where amino acids are formed (i.e. miller experiment) there are many problems. the biggest ones in my mind would be that cytosine is never formed and cytosine is essential as one of the four base pairs of dna and rna. without this essential base pair you can't form any life. also when amino acids are formed they will be in the racemic (both left- and right-handed) mixture and proteins can use only left-handed amino acids in order to be functional. however if both are formed, there is no way to distinguish which 'handed' molecule will link up since the reaction is driven by the lowest energy needed to form the bond and the gibbs free energy constant between the linkage of either a 'right-handed' or 'left-handed' amino acid is the same. even if you had the right requirements, the reaction still would not work because the evolutionists theorize a prebiotic soup as the initial 'setting' in which life arose. however, when in this setting, the reaction would tend to break proteins down into their individual amino acids instead of build them up. this is because when two amino acids join they release one molecule of water. conversely, the water that they are swimming in would react with the polypeptide to break it down into its' constituent parts. so given all the time in the world, it would never happen.
this is just a taste with the chemical aspects, but there are more. i'll post more later. i gotta get going. i am trained in biology and chemistry so i can make a better defence of these aspects. i have practically no training in astronomy or cosmology, so i wouldn't produce a strong attack against cosmological evolution. a book you might want to check out is starlight and time by d. russell humphreys. i haven't read it myself but i've heard it's so far the top notch creationist theory on cosmology. hope this helps somewhat. some rather scattered thoughts but i've got to get going. let me know if you have any questions. much love and God bless.
lost
--------------------
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. - Rev 22:17
Posts: 115 | From: Los Angeles/San Diego, CA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
HRB
Advanced Member
Member # 860
|
posted
quote:
Why is it that so many astronomical systems literally billions of light years away are observed as moving, dynamic, and full of activity? So then is it wrong to think old age is true if God purposely made it look that way? Did God pre-age everything not expecting us to beleive it?
Hi Duet 25:11,
Don't you think its intresting that God made light before he made the stars and the moon and the sun?
Look at:
Gen. 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen. 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Now look at:
Gen. 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the
night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15. And let them be for lights ing the firmament of the heaven to ghive light upon the earth: and it was so.
16. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also;
17. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
To me it's very interesting how light was made before the sun and stars. Maybe starlight was already here or made by the time or day God made the stars? Not sure I'm saying that right. Maybe the order of creation can help you answer your question about the starlight being so far away?
heidi
Posts: 62 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
art
unregistered
|
posted
I adhere to a young earth simply because as soon as one talks an old earth ,then the evolutionists come out of the woodwork. They need lots and lots of time and the old earth theory gives them what they want.
The earth has the appearance of age but is not much older than 6000 years according to all biblical geneology records.
But we mustn't get sidetracked on this issue too much, there is a lost and dying world out there and people need the gospel of Jesus Christ. That should be our focus.
IP: Logged |
|
|
njclary
unregistered
|
posted
REALLY ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
IP: Logged |
|
|
Kindgo
Advanced Member
Member # 2
|
posted
Very good post Brother Joel!
Excellent points quote:
Don't stew over the semantics; that is Satans ploy to get you off the track of working out your Salvation. We take things on Faith! that is what our relationship with God is all about. Faith! Do I believe God is Creator? Do I believe God Loved me so much, that He sent HIS SON to die for me. FAITH!
--------------------
God bless,
Kindgo
Inside the will of God there is no failure. Outside the will of God there is no success.
Posts: 4320 | From: Sunny Florida | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
njclary
unregistered
|
posted
NOW I may get in trouble; but here goes!
Deut; There are two schools of Christian thought in the reading of the Creation Story.the 6000+year creation, and the scientific creation based on Scriptural text. Neither are wrong! Strange to say,eh?
I got into trouble when I was given a " Westminster Confession" and told to teach it. The WC is the Presbyterian confessional. It is the doctrinal basis of Presbyterianism. I never liked to teach doctrine, and did'nt want to do this but I did. And what I did ,raised the ire of the pastor. I qualified it. I gave the class the opportunity to believe what they wanted. whooooo-boy. never taught in that class again! actually in that Church again!
Whatever you want to believe; when God calls each of us Home we'll understand then! You'll understand then! all that really is necessary, is knowing God Created all things! IN HIS TIME. and this universe is sooooooo vast that we still have not seen the end of it. Even with Hubble.
Don't stew over the semantics; that is Satans ploy to get you off the track of working out your Salvation. We take things on Faith! that is what our relationship with God is all about. Faith! Do I believe God is Creator? Do I believe God Loved me so much, that He sent HIS SON to die for me. FAITH!
God Bless
Joel
IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
I am not implying that because the age of the Universe is old (or appears to be old) that it must be all by accident and not by design. But you havent addressed my previous questions, not that you have to. And its cool if you dont want to.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
thanks for the links, let me study it for a few days
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Kindgo
Advanced Member
Member # 2
|
posted
Duet,
The earth's axis is tilted 23 1/2 degrees from the perpendicular to the plane of its orbit.
Without the tilted axis and the revolution around the sun, we wouldn't have the four seasons and growing food would be impossible.
The tilted axis also allows the earth to have twice as much land area that can be cultivated than if the sun were always over the equator.
The earth is positioned at just the right distance from the sun so that we receive exactly the proper amount of heat to support life.
If the earth's diameter were 10% larger or smaller, then life would either be burned up or frozen.
If the earth were to rotate at 1/10th the speed of its present rate, all plant life would either be burned up during the day or frozen at night.
Without the ozone layer which protects the earth from solar ultraviolet radiation, all life would be destroyed.
Without the ratio of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (20%) in air, life on earth would not be possible.
Earth is the only known planet that has water, making life possible.
Coincidence?
Or design by a Creator?
Links to Creation Sites
Answers in Genesis http://www.answersingenesis.org
Center for Scientific Creation http://www.creationscience.com
Creation Evidence Museum http://www.creationevidence.org
Creation Research Society http://www.creationresearch.org
Creation Science Evangelism http://www.drdino.com
Creation Science http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/index.htm
Creation Versus Evolution Controversy http://www.gennet.org/facts.htm
Institute for Creation Research http://www.icr.org
Reasons to Believe http://www.reasons.org
Revolution Against Evolution http://www.rae.org/revevchp.html
--------------------
God bless,
Kindgo
Inside the will of God there is no failure. Outside the will of God there is no success.
Posts: 4320 | From: Sunny Florida | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
i understand the logic with pre-aged earth but why would God give the universe the false apperance of age? I like learning about astonomy (check out Hubble Telescopes pics, WOW).
If God pre-aged everything, that would mean all the stuff we see thats farther than 5,000 light years away is, in essence, a lie. Why is it that so many astronomical systems literally billions of light years away are observed as moving, dynamic, and full of activity? So then is it wrong to think old age is true if God purposely made it look that way? Did God pre-age everything not expecting us to beleive it?
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Kindgo
Advanced Member
Member # 2
|
posted
I think there's a very simple explaination for the controversy over the age of the earth:
When God created Adam and Eve, he created them "pre-aged". They weren't born as infants.
When He created the Earth, it was also created "pre-aged". Otherwise, it would've simply been a smooth ball with no caves, rocks, valleys, mountains, trees, etc. Just a smooth ball of sand with plant seeds everywhere.
--------------------
God bless,
Kindgo
Inside the will of God there is no failure. Outside the will of God there is no success.
Posts: 4320 | From: Sunny Florida | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Deut 25:11
Advanced Member
Member # 900
|
posted
Old earth or new earth? What do you think?
Opinions are cool, but would like to focus on observable or measurable evidence. I dont claim any literacy on the topic but it stands to reason that however God made the Universe, the evidence (excluding the Bible) should be all around us in physical form. Links to other sites with data would be helpful since boards are limited in function.
Posts: 54 | From: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
