Earthage 101

A creationist forum to discuss how old the Earth is...All about how God may have done it. No argument whether God did it. We all believe he did.

You are not connected. Please login or register

Young Earth or Old Earth? Here is where to post your thoughts!

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Go down  Message [Page 7 of 9]

Not sure where you got that idea. I have been saying all along that the universe was established by the Trinity to develop humans as the end product of their creative cumulative works. We were not the result of random chance and natural selection as Darwinists believe. God predetermined and designed every creature that ever existed and this world brought them forth according to His plan. God has a perfect plan for getting more children and defeating evil in this world. This world, it's creatures, and the Trinity are executing the plan. Nothing happens that God didn't allow to happen. He knows every evil act that every human ever commits and has compensated the plan to deliver the results They want.

Now I know you haven't read or understood my posts if you think that intelligent apes could result from humans tampering with viruses to cure Alzheimer's disease and experimenting with them on apes. The movie is enjoyment and fiction but not the real world. Quite often the premise of the movie goes against the physical laws. One example is the movie 2012. A thousand mile shift in the continents in a matter of hours defies physical laws. It is imaginative and entertaining but also physically impossible. Without direct intervention by God the shift would not happen. However, this was human created fiction and should observe the physical laws. When they don't they lose credibility. In the case of Rise of The Planet of The Apes, viral alteration of the human and chimp genome is conceivable at least but still human written fiction. This major creation event is also not mentioned in the Bible and it has no credibility.

Lee scratch

View user profile

152Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty a scientific impossibility??? on Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:15 am

I haven't seen the film,
but is it not about apes getting human traits and characteristics?
Isn't that exactly what you have been defending with your whole being over the last few months/years?

View user profile

153Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Rise of the Planet of the Apes on Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:45 am


Just wanted to let you know, that I got a chuckle out of your post and that I really enjoyed watching the new release of the Rise of the Planet of the Apes recently. Strangely, I found myself rooting for the apes in their escape from the various facilities where they were being mistreated by their human scientist 'keepers'. I always enjoy good science fiction even though quite often it is based on some scientific impossibility. This scenario wasn't too bad though and much better than the original series which was poorly done. I was curious if any of you have seen the new movie.

Lee monkey

View user profile

154Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** Levity *** on Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:30 pm

One day the zoo-keeper noticed that the orangutan was reading two books
- the Bible and Darwin's the Origin of Species. In surprise he asked the ape,
"Why are you reading both of those books"? "Well," said the orangutan,
"I just wanted to know if I was my brother's keeper or my keeper's brother."?

20 Bret*11

View user profile

155Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Grabbing Hold of the Mind on Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:30 pm

Stu, your recent post declared 'that the Bible indeed has clearly revealed the truth of the matter. You will not be able to superimpose your speculative and damaging theories upon it.'

I agree with your first statement. It seems to me that you have the last part of your statement backwards. The Bible clearly indicates that the Holy Spirit was involved in creating new beings in the womb on numerous occassions. This is what I have been claiming all along, it's the Darwinists that claim this process is by chance, not me. Furthermore, God intentionally formed each creature's genetic code together to give them specific characteristics including His own as Jesus who was conceived through the Holy Spirit and born naturally of Mary a virgin. None of these Biblical statements involve popping a creature out dust. Your sole case rests on one verse (Ge 2:7) which is part of a highly symbolic and metaphorical chapter addressing the spiritual and sin nature of mankind. For that reason, forming Adam from the dust of the ground should be taken as symbolic as well and at least not as solid footing for turning dust to human flesh instantaneously. Elihu stated he was made of dust, but we know he was born from a mother just like all other humans. The traditional concept of instantaneous popping of things into existance is what is speculative and dangerous to the credibility of the Christian faith. The traditional view of popping animals into existance is total speculation based on ignorance and biased reading of the Bible and excludes any external knowledge of how the world really works.

Science is making a monkey out of your anti-Biblical and magical creature popping. If you think my theory is speculative and dangerous, as my Dad used to say, 'You have another thought commin'. Read the following verses if you doubt what I am claiming. The Bible and God himself states in it, that He creates all creatures in the parent's womb (by modifying the parent's genetic code based on modern understanding) to make each new creature and they each are born naturally from the womb. For advanced mammal 'kinds' and multicellular organisms, this is done by meoisis; for more primitive single cells kinds, this is done through mitosis. Since the Holy Spirit modifies the genetic code in humans to make each of us, why wouldn't He create new species descending from its parent in the same way since all biology is based on the same genetic process?

Biblical Evidence for Evolutionary Creation
Ps 139:13 NET Certainly you made my mind and heart; you wove me together in my mother’s womb. ESV For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.
Je 1:5 'Before I form thee in the belly, I have known thee; and before thou comest forth from the womb I have separated thee, a prophet to nations I have made thee.'
Jb 40:15 YLT Lo, I pray thee, Behemoth, that I made with thee: Grass as an ox he eateth. ASV 15 Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as thee; He eateth grass as an ox.
Jb 39:17 For God hath caused her [the behemoth] to forget wisdom, And He hath not given a portion To her in understanding
Is 41:4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I, Jehovah, the first, and with the last, I am he.
Is 44:2 ASV Thus saith Jehovah that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, who will help thee: Fear not, O Jacob my servant; and thou, Jeshurun, whom I have chosen
Is 44:24 ASVThus saith Jehovah, thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb: I am Jehovah, that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth (who is with me?);
Is 46:3 ASV Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, that have been borne by me from their birth, that have been carried from the womb
Jb 31:15 Did not he that made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb?
Ge 25:23 ASV And Jehovah said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, And two peoples shall be separated from thy bowels. And the one people shall be stronger than the other people. And the elder shall serve the younger.
Luke 1:35And the messenger answering said to her, `The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also the holy-begotten thing shall be called Son of God;
Luke 1:41 And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe did leap in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,42 and spake out with a loud voice, and said, `Blessed [art] thou among women, and blessed [is] the fruit of thy womb;

The Holy Spirit grabbed hold of my mind many years ago and led me to my current believe of an old earth and God creating through evolution. He pointed out the verses in the Bible as I read it and how He created it in the womb and after each kind by modification of each individual creature. In the Bible, He stated that He created each human and His first born human son through the Holy Spirit in their mother's womb. He confirms this in many verses; just search the Bible using the reference 'womb'. He opens the womb, closes the womb, forms in the womb, weaves/knits in the womb. He has reconfirmed this many times by studying many passages of the Bible from many perspectives. He created individual humans that way and knows how they will turn out before they are born. So why not all life forms in this same manner since they are simpler than us? Humans are the pinnacle of His creation and that is why He stopped creating new species with humans. Our spiritual natures and our souls (in God's image) are the desired end products of this God designed universe! Not some material construct from dust that happens to resemble an ape and a physical image of God! This universe and all its phsical objects are a throw away item. Only our Heaven bound non-material spirit and souls are priceless and eternal.

[b]Question: Please tell me what is so dangerous and speculative about extrapolating this same HS process of God created evolution to all the animal and plant generations preceding humans?[b/] God controls each being's characteristics and builds more advanced characteristics in new species according to His plan and personal enjoyment. During His creative changes, he adds information reversing the effects of entropy that plagues the Darwinian process. From generation to generation, the genetic codes of the species were built up by the actions of the Holy Spirit to more advanced species, some of which we find in the fossil record. Some modifications by the HS overcome the irreducible complexity barriers seen in many complexbiological processes and structures. This seems to me to be the only way forward through the highly improbable barriers that confound the Darwinian crowd.

I am 100% sure, He has made this creation and made the creatures in it through His guided evolution and selection generation after generation just as He states He does for humans. He even told me once in prayer that we descended from the apes and He was involved with this descent. I don't know how much clearer He can make it for me. God has a perfectly good system in place to create all His creatures and children naturally by birth, meosis, and mitosis from their parents, generation upon generation. No magic or popping was required to create individual human beings according to His plan either, they were all formed in the womb by the Holy Spirit, grown in the womb, and came from the womb; this I know, for the Bible (and God) tells me so.

We, humans, are the culmination of billions of years of genetic information advances that God enjoyed creating. We should be overjoyed that God went to the effort to make us His pinnacle of creation no matter how He accomplished it. Humans are unique in their capabilities to reason, understand, communicate, love, and create. These are the capabilities that God calls His image, because God is not physical. We were the last creation and very good in His judgement. I don't understand why you are so vehemently opposed to the Holy Spirit creating the first humans from subhumans and the subhuman generations from the apes using the same process God describes for human procreation. Please tell me what is so much better about the Holy Spirit popping Adam out of physical dust and making Him 96% the same genetically as an ape? What does that buy for Him, since the end product is the same.

God made everything and every being, generation to generation, in the womb (or its equivalent in other various forms of life). As you can see, I am adamant that your so called 'traditional' creation view is clearly wrong as evidenced by your inability to find even one verse that supports this instantaneous popping concept and your anti-evolutionary creation view. To compensate, you have had to create pure fiction to attempt to make your case. What a convoluted tale of fiction you have had to weave using the saints. You are also going against what God clearly states in the Bible about creating unique humans in the womb. You're also introducing new physical laws to pop cold biological matter instantaneously into existance , and introducing a new process never mentioned in the Bible to produce living beings!

Should I believe you or God? Easy answer, I believe God. I will pray that God gives you the same guidance that He has given me, that you see and understand what He already stated in the Bible and that you stop this reckless ficticious trial which is deceitful and is destroying your credibility and undermining credibility in the Christian faith. May God help you see the light!

Lee Arrow

PS. I will soon post an itemized response to each verse that you have claimed thus far to support your traditional view. It is too long to combine it with this post.

View user profile

156Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Thanks Bret .... on Mon Aug 29, 2011 12:52 am

For redirecting your bombshell into enemy territory.

I love the Ann Coulter article .. and delighted to see you cutting OEers some slack cheers

Have a good Lord's Day.


View user profile

157Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** What's going on behind the Curtain! *** on Sat Aug 27, 2011 12:46 pm

Sorry Stu ...

If you sustained some collateral damage from my TNT-laden preemptive strike Post!
I carefully chose my words by stating "Everyone AGAINST a YE Creation" !!!
Even though you are "currently" in the OE camp ... I don't believe that you're "Against"
me & Dr. Carter for believing in the Bible a little more literally than yourself?
So ... this peek behind the Evil Curtain was not a shot across your bow!

I'm sure that most of you think that my depiction was a little over-the-top?
Sadly ... I must tell you it was NOT !!!
Our secular adversaries are well organized ... and quite vicious!
They don't play nice ... because they're NOT playing!

My actual motivation for making my Post goes back to the Democratic attacks on Rick Perry
and the Republican Party ... (in general)!
I told you that there would be more & more Got-ya Questions coming ... as the Democrats
are not very happy with their guy anymore ... and know that the next President will be Republican!
So ... they are trying their darndest to influence who the Candidate will end up being!
They surely don't want a Christian!
A Mormon ... maybe?
But ... he better be one who holds "Science" over the Fairy Tales of his god (small "g") !!!

Here's a great little article by Ann Coulter that describes exactly what's going on!

Ah! Ah! ahh .......
Before you decide to skip over this article because you don't like Ann's hard hitting style?
I should point out that she's in your OE camp as well ... !!!
And ... because she's tall, blond, brilliant, & beautiful ... I'm willing to overlook some of her
flaws as well !!! Wink

20 Bret*11

View user profile

Rather than picking up a 2x4 and being ready to do battle with every OEer, why don't you at least try to seek common ground with at least some of us against a common enemy? I for one take no issue with Robert Carter's response, in fact I was very impressed with it (thanks Lucien for sharing). Even though I do not have the credentials to fully understand or validate what he is saying, he and I share the common biblical understanding that all humanity today came from the original 8 people on Noah's ark.

I also think he and I would agree that current genetic research points toward a single mother of all humanity (Mitochondrial Eve) and a single father of all humanity(y-chromosome Adam) -- both being specially created only thousands of years ago in the vicinity of where we would place the Garden of Eden.

As I said before, I am not out to change you to OE theology (even if I don't necessarily agree with you), but rather understand the reasons why you believe what you believe, and to jointly fight against the evils of evolutionary theology that's creeping into the Church.


View user profile

159Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** This can NOT be allowed to stand! *** on Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:23 pm


Man your Google Search Stations immediately!
We need someone to find some kind of minor misdeed ... or a social faux pas
of some sort ... that can be used to discredit Dr. Carter!

I'm sure that he's done something wrong (or at least questionable) since his birth?
Or ... maybe we can find a photo of him standing next to (or near) somebody that
is known to possess a morally flawed character?
(photoshopping is also an option!)

There is NO way of (credibly) challenging him on his data or on his logic ...
so we are obviously forced to go down the Ad hominem highway!

Remember team! ... Young Earth Believer = Buffoon !!!
Don't ever forget that!
And ... let's not let anyone else ever forget that as well !!!

20 Bret*11

View user profile

160Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Interesting article? on Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:05 am


thought this was quite interesting.

I will not further comment on it, as I think the author of the letter is not God-honoring, and Dr Carter far more qualified to answer than me.


View user profile

161Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** Not exactly sure what this means? *** on Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:57 pm

I just want to point out an unusual thing that keeps happening here on the Blog!
For those that don't know ... Lucien & I have NEVER met !!!
If it were not for Stu inviting him to join the Blog ... I doubt that our paths would have ever crossed?
You see ... Lucien lives in Scotland !!!
The rest of us (active Bloggers) all live here in Southern California (mostly OC)!

But here's the point of peculiarity!
Even though Lucien & I live on opposite sides of the Pond (as he might say)...
We can finish each other's sentences ... like Spiritually born-again identical twins!
If I didn't know better ... I would say that we were getting the same "Talking Points"
sent to us ... like Democratic Political talking-heads that go on TV to perpetuate their
current LIE for the day!
But ... unlike the Demon-crats who have already received "the Mark" from their Master!
We both just read the Bible, clearly understand it with amazing similarity, & then defend it
to the best of our abilities Spiritually, Scientifically, & most importantly ... Logically !!!

For what ever reason ... when it comes to the old-timers (OE's)... I have yet to meet two
of them that hold to similar enough views of their reinterpretations of God's Word that you
(or they) could say that they hold to the SAME views!

This is not a cheap-shot ... or a personal attack on anyone in particular!
It is just an observation (that can't be denied)... and may honestly mean nothing ...
but seems like an unhealthy trend to me?

By the way! ... welcome back Lee!
Grandkids need to be spoiled !!!
And ... as a Grandpa ... that's your job now! Very Happy

20 Bret*11

View user profile

162Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Would it be possible for God...? on Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:46 am

Aha, got your attention!

Stu said "I can't be dogmatic about the age of the earth since the Bible doesn't declare how old the earth is. It's our hermeneutic (YE, OE, Gap) that leads to our position -- there's not an explicit statement."

I have heard others say this too, so it is nothing new.
Would it be possible for the Bible to have an explicit statement?
Let's think about some possibilities here (hypothetically of course):

1) 6000 years ago, God created the heavens and the earth.
Every year we would have a new edition of the Bible. Quite similar to the science textbooks, they keep getting new editions. Fortunately, this is not the case. God's Word is the same yesterday, today and forever.

2) In 4004 BC God created the heavens and the earth.
This is better, but for people in the OT this would mean little to nothing. Sure, God had His prophets prescribe Jesus arrival, starting in Gen. 3:15. But nobody knew exactly when. Sure, Herod tried to kill Him AFTER he had been tipped by the wise men, but for over 4000 years (or hundreds of thousand/millions of years if your OE), this statement would be no good to anyone.

3) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
When is "the beginning"?
Answer: Well, not after millions and billions of years, but rather at Tzero, i.e. the beginning.

To me (and Bret), the beginning begins at the beginning, and week 1 certainly fits the beginning better than after millions of years.
But of course, you all knew this already...


View user profile

163Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Great question Bret on Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:36 am

Thanks for your interest. Unfortunately I'll have to do this is short and intermittent bursts as my time will be mostly spent preparing for Day 6 and 7 of the trial Cool and starting a new business at the same time.

A backslidden YEer Very Happy -- that's a good one! But it's somewhat true. I am committed to the Bible as the final authority on the topic. Even though I hold to OE theory, it is tentative. I can't be dogmatic about the age of the earth since the Bible doesn't declare how old the earth is. It's our hermeneutic (YE, OE, Gap) that leads to our position -- there's not an explicit statement. On the other hand with TE, the Bible is very clear -- God directly created Adam and Eve; they did not evolve from animals. You see where I dig in when I think the Bible speaks clearly on a topic.

My early YE formulation was guided more by wanting to fit into a church than it was from my reading of Scripture. The guidance from the church was tenuous at best. Not that many people even talked about science, let alone cared about it -- an unfortunate state of affairs. Some of the more interested told me about a "a place in San Diego that does that kind of thing." The people who worked in science were pretty mum about the topic.

It was very unclear to me in those early days what exactly was going on in the seven days of Genesis. My first impression was that it was God's story of creation -- possibly poetic -- telling of the glory of all that He created. I enjoyed Job 38 and 39, the Psalms and Isaiah in the same way. I was skeptical that there was hard science (in the modern sense) mysteriously buried in the text -- although I knew whatever the text said would be consistent (eventually) with science. That understanding was to mature over time.

The was one matter that was very important to me -- that I wouldn't be checking my brain at the door. I needed my new Faith and my scientific training to be consistent about the most fundamental observations about the universe -- the first and second laws of thermodynamics. If there wasn't a reconcilliation there I'm not sure that I could have taken the step of faith.

(1) Matter/Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. But there it is -- out of nothing! ==> God created!!
(2) The universe is running down and will eventually die. That means it had to have a beginning! ==> In the beginning, God!!

For the two most fundamental laws of physics science leaves the God-hypothesis off the table! I saw myself being more "scientific" than they were -- following truth wherever it would lead.

Please be careful about your assumptions about me. It was not necessarily science that drove me back to question Genesis 1; or Ken Ham's arrogance. It was a combination of factors as I approached the matter, as I do today, with the Bible in one hand (and a progressing theological education and library); and observation of the world around me on the other hand (with a science education and library); and some intellect for attempting to reconcile the two, and how to discern regarding people of differing persuasions. But at the foundation of it all is the inerrant Word of God which trumps all.

I'm afraid I'll have to sign off for now -- just before I approach the heart of what you're asking. But thank you for asking as I think our dialog will give us both a better perspective for each other's stance. As I said before, when the issue comes up, my position has been and will continue to be, "Some Christians believe the earth is 6000 years old; some believe 4-1/2 billion years old. But the real issue is Jesus Christ and His resurrection. What are you going to do with that? My opinion or yours about the age of the earth has little bearing on the matter."

Your Brother in Christ,


p.s. Lee re: your new post to me. The most encouraging portion of your reply was, I am reading his posts for entertainment value, though, and just in case he finds, some day, a verse that actually applies to our dispute.

I'll continue to pray that the Holy Spirit grabs hold of your mind so you will see that the Bible indeed has clearly revealed the truth of the matter. You will not be able to superimpose your speculative and damaging theories upon it.

Last edited by stu on Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:02 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : edited the p.s.)

View user profile

My daughter and grandson came for a visit for ten days and I been really busy being a grandfather and entertainer. You got way ahead of me but I'll try to catch up on some of the topics. I see you have quite a mutual appreciation society going now. Here is my input from a completely different prespective of course since I am not a YE or see any substance supporting instantaneous creation of animals and plants.

Science has proven deep time and that the age of universe is 13.7 billion years old. The YE version of creation can't produce the beef and that is why billions of people around the world stand in the science line instead of the YE line for steak. The line of reasoning behind the YE concepts is just sizzle. We have gone through the cuts of meat provided by science over the last two years: prime cuts from cosmology that explain the types and quantities of elements, stars and galaxies in the heavens, aged choice filets from the earth's radiometric dating, roast of heavy elements in stars that constitutes our dust, ground round tectonic plates, aged fossils in cumulative layers formed over hundreds of millions of years, chopped flank of oceanic plates showing periodic magnetic field reversals, and deep frozen ice cores from Anartica showing hundreds of thousands of years in layers. This claim the YEs have made to serve the beef is non-existent. You have imaginary beef which is more like spam.

Day One
Speaking of imagination, to conjecture that the hebrew translation of 'day one' solidifies the YE view for half a 24 hour day takes a lot of brass. A simple alternative explanation provided by Ross and others is that the sun and earth didn't exist for part of the first creation day and that is why the Hebrew terminology is different for 'day one'. The appearance of the light above the waters could either be the light from the formation and ignition of the sun reaching the earth's water surface (which takes millions of years by the way after the fusion event at the core) or the planetoid collision which also made our moon and thinned the atmosphere. Before then there wouldn't have been a daylight or a morning to dusk period.

White Holes
I am curious on what Lucien has in mind about white holes. Hawking dreamed them up based on virtual particle creation at the surface of a black holes that is caused by the quantum uncertainty principle creating particle and antiparticle pairs at the black hole surface. The outbound ones would escape the black hole, while the inbound ones would be trapped. The presumed escape of these particles drains mass slowly from the black hole until the mass of the black hole can no longer prevent the remaining mass in the black hole from escaping. This event is the white hole explosion and returns the captured mass in the form of high energy photons to space-time. These entities are highly speculative and hotly debated in the scientific community. Virtual particle creation due to the uncertainty principle also would mean an extremely higher cosmological constant than that which is presently observed in our universe. I wouldn't take too much stock in them since the laws of the general relativity and quantum physics have not been unified and are presently incompatible with each other. Also, no one has confirmed that these events have actually occurred!


When looking back over the posts of this past month, I came to the following conclusion: I would rather be the great descendent of a monkey's uncle that sought the truth of the Bible and about the real world than a not so great descendent of piece of dirt that spins imaginary tales of deceit about his ancestry while using the good names of the saints as accessories to the crime while doing it. Stu, or whoever he is, may go on indefinitely with his traditional case and include his new imaginary friend as the plaintiff, but the die has been caste for his ficticious case.  No matter what testimony he provides, everyone knows it is pure fiction or make believe testimony in the best scenario from his own biased imagination and in the worst scenario deception to prop up a failed creation concept without Biblical or scientific support. Although stating many verses of the Bible, he has not provided any verses that clearly support his views of instantaneous creation by God of each kind of animal or against God uniquely making each creature naturally from its parent. The saddest part of this is that the opportunity to make a biblical case for the traditional view about popping creatures into existence instantaneously and against god driven evolution has been lost without providing real biblical evidence to support his traditional postulate. Furthermore by taking this approach of using saints' names to spin this tale of fiction, he has damaged his credibility and reputation to the point where I for one can no longer take things he states about the Bible seriously or bother to respond. What a sad end to a trustworthy and scholarly image after many years of honest and passionate devotion to Christian evangelism.  I am reading his posts for entertainment value, though, and just in case he finds, some day, a verse that actually applies to our dispute. I have never seen such a school of red herrings in all my years, their color and swirling spinning motions are quite soothing for someone that actually studies reality and the Bible.

I don't know if the YEs still want to base their support of their instantaneous views of creating plants and animals on Stu's series of posts or abandon his approach and try their own. So far anyway, you have not provided any support for your instantaneous creation views other that claiming that is what the Bible says. However, we have analyzed this claim and found that it is not what the Bible states. The Bible states that the earth and waters bring them forth each kind after its own kind generation after generation. God further states in many verses that he makes humans unique in their mother's womb and there are no verses that indicate that He makes animals any differently. Instantaneous creation of plants and animals has been found to be all in your imagination so far. Are you going to build you evolution case on Stu's weak foundation or move somewhere else?

[Bret]- 'So ... the only part of my Question that I had hoped you could have been a little
clearer on is ...
Did the "rate" of Entropy increase (or change) greatly from the beginning of Creation
until now (present day!) ???'

At first the universe freely expanded, so the universe increased entropy at a very high rate (higher than the Union Rate), as symmetries were broken, some of the energy tranformed and locked into particles which decreased the entropy rate. As the universe cooled, more and more of the energy became locked into particles, the entropy rate continued to decrease since particles are fairly stable and provide order for some of the energy. As the universe expanded and energy of the particles and bosons were reduced, the entropy rate continued to decrease until it reached the fairly high present rate in some systems of the gov't or union worker where inefficiency is relished and lying is rewarded. This being said, there is still an enormous difference in the entropy rates based on the system of interest. Accelerated expansion of the universe has an extremely high entropy rate on the existing information in the universe. However, look at me for instance, my rate is very low, since I haven't changed my point of view in over two years on theistic evolution and continue to add factual support for it. My brain waves are exceedingly consistent. This rate of entropy for this thought system is effectively zero and only grows when I forget a reason that I once knew as to why I am so solidly convinced of the truth in it. Truth is like that, it has zero entropy and gets copied and distributed by logical minds. The mind or Spirit is the only way to stop or reverse the effects of entropy; you know: mind over matter.

[Bret]- 'Did the Universe start out like the "Clock"... but wind up like the "Union Workers"?
(pun intended!)'

Heat death in the long term future of the universe will slow the entropy rate to be roughly equivalent to the union worker (just joking of course). Interactions of materials and energy will occur as such a slow rate that a union worker won't be able to punch his clock or communicate to have another one do it for them. I don't see this rate as much different than the present government entropy rate, since the present system provides so little work output and is based on deception, distortion, hype, and power grabbing. At least the existing fixed laws will control the entropy rate honestly without the influence of corrupt politicians and unions brass which would likely accelerate it.


View user profile

165Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** What happened to Lee? *** on Mon Aug 22, 2011 3:10 pm

Should we start checking our Milk Cartons for more information about Lee?
I might not agree with his TE stance ... but if he's on yet another vacation ...
I totally agree with his views on Retirement !!!

Stu ...

My Carl Sagan reference was just in reference to him making the term "Billions & Billions"
famous ... and was not meant to imply that studying the Cosmos is where one finds the
best evidence against Evolution! But ... my poorly structured statement was likely misleading?
I was actually agreeing with you that Evolution could never happen in even a Trillion years!

I really want to thank you for your level of honesty & openness as it pertains to your past
views on YE creation! This means that you're not really an OE after all ...
you're just a back-sliden Young Earther! (just kidding!)

I enjoyed your story ... but you glazed over the most important part!
You said that you didn't believe in Evolution based on your reading of the Bible!
And ... it wasn't until later that the lack of Scientific evidence proved this to be correct!

Following the same logic ... your acceptance of a Young Creation must have been derived
in a similar manner?
Other than your dislike of Ken Ham's arrogance ... what exactly was it that lead you to side with
the Science over the traditional position of the Church?
Both of your original views stemmed from the same reading of Genesis 1 ... right?
So ... what was the compelling Scientific evidence that changed your mind on the issue of
the age of the Universe ... but had no effect on your trust that Genesis 1 had it right when it
came to the issue of Evolution?

I believe this is really at the very heart of our differences?
Can we (please) stick to Scientific evidence first?
Because it had to be the Science that sent you back to Genesis 1 to dig deeper into the text?
We can go over what you dug up in the text later!
But ... it is what sent you back to the text that is of most interest to me right now!

If any of this comes across as an attack? ... you'll just have to trust me that that is in no way
my intentions! I honestly want to know what it was/is that gives you confidence in your stance?

Thanks again for your openness ... Stu!

20 Bret*11

View user profile

166Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty magic wand on Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:10 am

I'd concur Bret.
Deep time is the magic wand,
also because (and you have ALL heard this before): "no matter how small the chance, given enough TIME..."

Just look at the amount of people gambling. They all think they are going to be the lucky one.
Only difference is that if it is a legit lottery, there will be a "lucky one", who gets lots of attention, somewhat alike to airplane crashes causing many to fear flying, but yet statistically it is the safest method of transport.
The basic set-up of any gambling game: the vast majority lose, but DEEP TIME has the magical power to convince people that if you play long enough you come out a winner.

Just like the guy who loses a tiny bit on every sale, and tries to make up by selling lots and lots and lots.

View user profile

167Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Acutally .... on Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:03 am

Thanks Bret for the good dialog.

Actually .... it wasn't study of the Cosmos that led me to "0 Evolution," it was study of the Bible. I was coming at Christianity from a scientific perspective which gave credence to evolution. When I read the Bible, however, it said that "God created ... " and I was believe it -- which I did. It was only later through my study of creation that I found out the appalling thin "evidence" upon which evolution lay.

At the time (1979) YE creation was the prevailing Church view and I was committed to believe that as well. I was an ICR fan and read and subscribed to their materials. I even mapped out my own biblical genealogies to arrive at a creation date. I argued that man and dinosaurs co-existed and had "footprints proof" and pictures to prove it. Then I started looking at the science and biblical texts behind those claims. The rest is my story.

My point is that God has given each of us a path from which to discover Him, and our initial point of entry is just that -- our initial point of entry. The rest of our growth comes from wrestling with His Word and studying the world (creation) around us. I'm afraid "removing deep time" from the process is not going to produce the desired effect you are hoping for. In fact, for some (many?)of us it is going to push us in other directions.


View user profile

168Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** From one Fool to Other! *** on Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:21 am

Stu ...

I totally agree with you about (Macro) Evolution being Impossible to ever happen ...
no matter how many Billions & Billions of years that Carl Sagan wants to imagine!

But ... this awareness of yours comes by way of countless hours of research reading
multiple publications written by several different experts approaching this issue
from both ends of the spectrum! (I hope?)

The common Man does not have the mental resources, the patience, or enough personal
interest invested into discovering this blatant Fact !!!

To MOST people (other than yourself)... the "Deep Time" is KEY to Evolution!
They may not know very much Scientific detail about Evolution ... but they are aware
of the Fact that 6000 years = 0 Evolution !!!

Therefore ... remove their certitude in "Deep Time" and Evolution becomes a Modern-day Fairytale!

I will offer some more comments about your Post a little later!

20 Bret*11

View user profile

169Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Thanks Lucien on Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:29 am

I'm proud of both you and Bret for defending God's Word with such passion. Irrespective of us not agreeing on the interpretation of Scripture regarding the age of the earth, we both are seen as fools to the world because of what you said to the girl regarding Christ -- that we believe in "a man who walked on water, was born of a virgin, turned water into wine and was raised from the dead."

Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:22-23)

Last edited by stu on Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:41 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : grammar)

View user profile

170Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Great start! on Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:51 am


This is the kind of dialog I too have been wanting all along! Perhaps we needed to spar for a couple of rounds first. I'll try to keep my replies to short bursts to keep the conversation lively.

Your "deep time for evolution to occur" has never been an issue to me. First of all, evolution is bogus no matter how much time there is, and it's multi-bogus within a 14 billion year old universe. The secular physicists and mathematicians know this. It's the biological establishment that keeps its "unifying principle" in place because it has nowhere else to go; and fellow scientists in other disciplines just accommodate them. It's like you own a Mercedes dealership and they have a Ford dealership. You really don't care what they're doing except together you want cars in general to be selling well so you cooperate with them.

Human evolution is mega-bonus, even within some of the biological disciplines. Man evolving from unknown hominids to homo sapien sapien in a couple of hundred thousand years? Now those folks are only in the game with steel plates (not just blinders) over their eyes!

I want kids to be digging for truth (which many times is tentative*) not just taking in what's easy. To me that's one of the Church's major problems today as leaders and parents complain: "They won't sit still if they have to dig. Just dish it up to them and make it fun." That goes for the Bible as well as for science, history, politics, et. al. Perry's answer was the appropriate Christian response, not just a savvy political one, "we teach Creation & Evolution because we believe that smart kids (such as yourself) will be able to figure out what the right answer is."

*for the Bible that means interpretation which requires hermeneutics and theology, not just indoctrination. Of course this is done in an age appropriate manner.

View user profile

171Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** Did you see THAT ??? *** on Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:28 pm

Attention ALL !!!

For those who think that the age of the Earth is a menial issue of little importance ...
Did you see the Democratic Operative that sent her young son up to Presidential
Candidate "Rick Perry" (while secretly phone filming the conversation) to ask him
"the Question"... HOW OLD IS THE EARTH? !!!

This was the first (of many more to come)... attempt to catch a response that is too
Christian to a gotya question ... so he can be tarred & feathered as an Anti-intellectual !!!

In case anyone is curious as to his answer? ... He said ...
"I don't know for sure? I'm sure that it's pretty old? In Texas ... we teach Creation & Evolution
because we believe that smart kids (such as yourself) will be able to figure out what the right
answer is" !!!

What a politically savvy answer!
If he had said that he believes Scientists are likely right about it being 4 to 5 billion years old ...
then he would have damaged his support with the Christian Right!
If he had said that he chooses to trust God's Word that tells us that God created everything in
6-days about 6000 years ago ... HE WOULD BE OUT OF THE RACE in less than a week!

Two years ago ... if a Candidate were to doubt Global Warming ... he would have also been crucified !!!
Things Change! ... and even MORE things will Change in the future!

20 Bret*11

View user profile

172Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty *** Renewing the Dialog! *** on Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:42 am

Brother Stu ...

Thank you for (at least) wanting to try to understand my "Key" point in all of this!
I will try to explain this in as many ways that I can come up with ...
so please understand the following redundancy is NOT condescension! Very Happy

With a Strong Scientific & Biblical defense of a "Young" Creation ...
there is NO possibility for Evolution to creep into the Church!
Evolution NEEDS "Deep Time" to even have an iota of a chance of being believed!
It wasn't until Charles Lyell sold the other Chuck on the concept of "Deep Time"...
that even he could envision a scenario where Evolution could take place!
Lyell was the REAL game changer!
Darwin just moved the ball down the field into HELL !!! Twisted Evil

Teaching Kids (& others)... that the Bible tells us of a "Young" Creation is easy!
(I know this is where we differ GREATLY! ... but please don't just glaze over this!)
Most people are pretty "simple" and fairly self-absorbed!
So ... introducing somebody to the Bible (for the 1st time)... followed by an immediate
discussion of the Hebrew language and sophisticated dissertations about Hermeneutics
before you can even finish the 1st Chapter of God's Word is likely damaging ... or at
least polluting a New Believers ability to embrace the Bible?
Maybe I'm wrong? ... but I think it's just better to hand them the Bible ... then tell
them to "Pray" that God would open their Eyes, Ears, & Heart to the Truth that He wants
them to understand from reading His Word!

Now ... when it comes to explaining the Science of a "Young" Creation (because we are
now forced to deal with information "outside" of the Bible)... things get much more
difficult for a Christian to explain!
We both know that Evolution is ALWAYS (and constantly I might add)... being referred to
as FACT ... and that anyone who would doubt this is too stupid or ill-informed about
Science to be listened to seriously!
This goes double for us Hillbillies who would dare to challenge "Deep Time" !!!
Instantly ... allegations of belief in a "Flat Earth" and "Geocentrism" are sure to follow!
The Galilean lies are repeated! ... and the misinformation is NEVER challenged?

Correct me if I'm wrong about this? ... but it is the "Distant Starlight" ... & the
"Radiometric Dating" issues that are at the core of your "Old Earth" beliefs?
If so? ... would you be willing to hear me out on some amazing NEW "Secular" Science
information that is NOW (finally) being revealed openly to the general public concerning these issues?
Don't get me wrong here! ... I'm definitely NOT saying that Secular Scientists are
promoting (or even allowing a possibility of) a "Young" Universe ... but they are
starting to question their current paradigm as possibly being inherently flawed!
Because I haven't been able (yet) to completely figure out where "They're" going with
this? ... I've been holding back from Posting this information on the Blog!

Well? ... did I do a sufficient job of explaining my point?
Is there anything else that you would be willing for me (or wanting me) to expound on ???

Thanks again Stu ... for the opportunity to share!

20 Bret*11

View user profile
Hi Bret,

I'll give you an AMEN to your Post Title and the fact we still have something to blog about! This could get very interesting. But first I need to understand better what you mean by certain statements. The first is below. Would you please expound on it to help me fully understand?

Thank you,

Bro Stu

My added (bitter pill) point was that ... by showing the inherent flaws in the logic
that lead people to believe that "Deep Time" is a given ... you only Strengthen your
argument AGAINST Evolution ... of ALL forms ... Theistic or otherwise!

View user profile
Stu ...

You forgot to quote what I said right before my statement of our theoretical potential
to be a Spiritual Steamroller against Secular Science propaganda & arrogance!

"In reality ... I'm aware that there's virtually no way that all of us could ever reach an effective
consensus on the Creation issue ... and work as a Team against the secular misinformation
that is being used as a Spiritual roadblock to accepting the Truth that God has given us!"

So ... my point was that I'm all for it ... but realize it just can't happen!
And here's why ...
You (& I believe the rest of us) want to warn Kids about the Dangers of what Lee believes!
Lee wants to teach everyone that WE are ALL wrong about the Bible ... and that our
teachings are misleading & dangerous!
Lucien & myself ... want to warn the Kids (& everyone else) that accepting ANY compromise
of God's Word is unwise ... and can lead to your ultimate demise!
Dave just wants to let people know that ANY of us could be right ... or maybe ...
ALL of us are possibly wrong?

With all that said ...
Stu ... I have absolutely NO problem with your idea about crafting some kind of
presentation for Kids ... to help show them the inconsistencies with forcing Evolution
into God's explanation of His Creation!
My added (bitter pill) point was that ... by showing the inherent flaws in the logic
that lead people to believe that "Deep Time" is a given ... you only Strengthen your
argument AGAINST Evolution ... of ALL forms ... Theistic or otherwise!

I am also a HUGE fan of the brilliant men behind the Intelligent Design movement !!!
Again ... my (missed) point was that by distancing themselves from God's Word ...
instead of strengthening their credibility with the Scientific Community (which was
their intent)... they ended up weakening their overall effectiveness as a movement!

If we really want to reach Today's youth with our message ... we need to create and
promote a NEW paradigm!
It needs to be BOLD! ... but Brief & Simple to understand!
Complicated and tedious splitting of Scientific hairs isn't going to cut it!
This is where Brother Dave could prove to be invaluable as a PR guy!
Create a SHOCKING soundbite of "Truth" so simple that trying to refute it makes one look stupid !!!
Kids love to sound smart ... especially when they don't have to think about it!
Satan has been winning this propaganda war with LIES for the last 150 years!
So ... why can't we turn this around with some cleverly crafted TRUTH ???

Can I get me an Amen on that one?

20 Bret*11

View user profile

175Young Earth or Old Earth?  Here is where to post your thoughts! - Page 7 Empty Hi Bret on Fri Aug 19, 2011 2:38 pm

I just want to point out that it really doesn't appear you want to, " work as a Team against the secular misinformation that is being used as a Spiritual roadblock to accepting the Truth that God has given us!" (your words). It looks as if you just want to win the argument. I don't have any problem with that, after all that's how we started out. But I was beginning to think you meant what you said on 8/13:

"It's really sad when you think about it! Collectively ... we have a Science Engineer ... a veteran Lab & Field Science technician ... an International (multilingual) Chemical Gas Scientist ... a Science degreed Theologian ... and an amateur Theologian that owns his own PR firm and knows how to package, promote, and sell anything! If we could work together as a Team for God ... we could make a HUGE impact on the war against Scientific Atheism ... and anti-Christian misinformation !!!"

Then in your 8/18 post, instead of addressing what I asked about -- feedback concerning a proposal to teach theology to High Schoolers about the evils of theistic evolution -- you replied, "If you weren't so quick to accept the unproven assumptions that trick you into believing that Science has "proven" the existence of "Deep Time"... you wouldn't have to fight so hard to keep Evolution out of the Church!"

Sorry Bret, but I'm stuck on what our blog relationship should be.



View user profile

Sponsored content

Back to top  Message [Page 7 of 9]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum