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

Glad to be back, even if it is only once in a while. I am grateful to be busy these days, but I hate not having the time to join in when I want to.

Here are some answers...

[Dave] - 'You can't claim to have an all-powerful God and then limit his omnipotence by claiming he has to comply with fixed laws of the universe He created....It's neat to debate which direction the evidence tips in with respect to the age of the Earth and the universe, but when it includes dogmatic statements claiming to "know" that God has kept all of his physical laws, we claim to know the mind of God. Scripture says His ways are not our ways and they are higher than ours, remember?'

The only reason that I have claimed that God uses fixed laws is because He claims he uses fixed laws. Je 33:25, Job 38:4, Je 38:33. Of course, He can change the laws, but He states that He made the laws fixed. This has nothing to do, with my thinking I know the mind of God, but has a lot to do with carefully studying the Bible, believing everything He said, and integrating it together into an honest and truthful picture of the world and God's larger reality. It seems to be our challenge to figure out as best we can how He can accomplish miracles using these laws and how His marvelous creation really works. I have only been trying to describe my views on how He does it using the existing laws and describing how these laws give Him the control that He needs. I don't think you have read all my posts, otherwise you wouldn't have made this remark. You would have seen that the existing physical laws and their independent control variables provide virtually total control to the point where changing the physical laws are unnecessary to accomplish most of the miracles in the Bible. If you want me to point out these posts to you just let me know.


Fair enough, so let's read the scriptures:

Je 33:25 - Thus says the LORD: If I have not established my covenant with day and night and the fixed order of heaven and earth [then I will reject the offspring of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his offspring to rule over the offspring of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and will have mercy on them.]

I think it is more than reasonable to assume the "fixed order of heaven and Earth" more likely pretain to how things get done in God's Kingdom, and less about him not allowing things to happen which do not fit into our current physical description and understanding of the universe. Not sure I would use this as "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" for an absolute statement on the likelihood of theistic evolution. If I have you wrong, please correct me.

Job 38:4 - Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.


Sorry Lee, but I do not understand how this scripture offers support for this idea at all. God laid the foundation of the Earth, and neither Job nor I were there.Je 38:33 - Jeremiah 38 ends at verse 28...I am sure you meant somewhere else...

I guess as someone who really wants to see evidence for God's old Earth, I can't honestly say these passages confirm consistency in the physical laws.

Another, claim that you made was that the sun wasn't created until the fourth day and it was God's light produced on the first day. I was wondering what your rationale was for not including the sun as part of the heavens made on 'Day' 1. Your analysis shows that the earth and the stars were made on 'Day' 1. Your analysis seems to permit a clear view of the stars, and moon through the atmosphere on Day 4 so why couldn't the sun also have been viewable and hidden before by clouds in the atmosphere for instance?

Actually, I didn't say that but rather made the opposite point. The words natar, which means to "appoint" more than anything else, and asa, which means to "reveal" or "bring forth" more than create. I think God changed things to reveal the sun moon and stars all on Day 4, after which time He uses the Sun and the Moon to govern day and night. After that, I think you can make a stronger argument for the use of Yom as a a celestial day.

Funny Lee, how Bret calling you pretentious raises your eyebrows, but in the next few lines of your post you go right ahead and use the exact same terminology on him and Stu. Doesn't that strike you as odd?

You continue to write on entropy, even many paragraphs now, where I have not taken the word in my mouth for a long time.
I agree with you that entropy did not start to exist AT the fall. That's where your straw man comes in. You think I did, but I did not.
And I certainly do not call God evil, but I argued that a god using death, suffering and disease to get to a point where he finally could call it very good, would be considered by most people as a poor designer at least, and evil possibly by most (certainly me).

But seeing that I am a Biblical creationists and believe everything was very good until the fall, I do not fall in that category. The God from the Bible is GOOD, and gets it right first time, without having to waste millions of years.
In fact, He could have done it in a split second, but then He would not have set the example of a week for us.

But you keep living in your dream world and shooting down straw men.


Lucien
BSc Applied Physics

Bret,
I didn't think I could last for seventy times seven or an unlimited number of times, so I used the NET version which is just seventy-seven times (an alternate way of translating the verse). God knows I couldn't so he gave me a smaller number for Lucien knowing that he will be reducing his attacks as he gains wisdom and becomes more Christlike.

As for calling me pretentious, I am hoping you will be reducing the name calling as well, since you want to be known as Mr. Nice Guy. This seems pretentious based on your posting history and some recent posts, but that would be wonderful if you really became the nice guy here. This will mean that you will no longer post insinuations, put downs, distortions about someone's character or what they have stated, and always honest and trustworthy in your views and posts while being a peacemaker. They also follow through on their commitments to others. My best wishes on attaining this, really. I have noticed that you have definitely improved in the area, so congrats on the progress.

I am not sure if you've noticed an additional case of pretention on this blog. Stu has been pretending lately to be various dead saints of the church and having them say what he wants them to say in a mock trial. Doesn't this receive some kind of special recognition for pretention since you have list me as being pretentious?

Lee

Matthew 18:22
King James Version (KJV)

22Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
(Not ... Seventy and Seven!)

Mistranslated and missing the Lord's point!
Jesus was saying that your forgiveness should know NO limits ... just like His!


HEY! ... DAVE IS BACK! (?)

Great to hear from someone with a different point of view!
I still feel really bad about being so rough with you ...
way back when this Blog actually began!
I can't help but feel-like that I was the one that caused you to pack-it-in?

Strangely ... as you can see (read)...
I have (somehow) become the nice guy around here ... and Lee has become the pretentious powerhouse!
Even (lovable) Stu ... has become much maligned !!?

I would love to go over your Day-by-Day analysis of Creation!
I know that you're a very busy man!
But ... everyone should make (at least a little) time to debate God's Word!
I will begin posting (in a few days) a response to your commentary ... one day at a time!
I really hope to see you continue to jump-in and Post-away ... as God knows ...
this Blog really needs to get some new blood & fresh ideas posted here!



20 Bret*11

Lucien,
Are you hoping to win the debate by calling me names now and slinging insults? Sometimes I wonder if you are worth the effort that I put in trying to increase your knowledge and wisdom. This day is one of them. 

My prayer: God give me patience; you have been patient with me and I owe you everything, but I have forgiven Him seven times already, this may be too much for me to handle.

God: "Not seven times, I tell you, but seventy-seven times! 

Okay, I will continue, but he only has seventy left. 

Lucien you made the following statement to Stu:
 'God did NOT design long periods of millions of years full of death, disease and suffering of the creatures that were allegedly living during those eons of time!
So if evolution is to be considered at all, the atheistic version is the more plausible version, as the theistic one depicts the god of this evolution as an ogre and merciless murderer of billions of various creatures.'

My point of the post was to let you know that both life and death depend on entropy.  Both the atheistic version and the theistic evolution versions include entropy. The six-day creationist version also depends on entropy to develop the earth, to change it over the first five days and to allow each  organism to live.  Don't you know that every living breath taken depends on entropy increasing, how long can a whale or Adam hold their breaths?Minutes to hours maybe before dying, Oh that's right, only seconds since oxygenation of the blood stream would stop immediately if entropy stopped.  

If time and order exist then entropy follows.  God made the universe with time and gave it order.  The fact that you are living right this second depends on entropy.  Every chlorophyll containing organism relies on entropy to produce sugars and fats from higher energy/ lower entropy sunlight.  Other organisms need these sugars, fats and their protein for food to survive.  Animals eat other plants and animals for food so they can live.  Digestion of this food is essential to life and this digestion is fundamentally built on entropy.  The respiration that provides oxygen to all your cells to burn these fats and sugars for energy also depends on entropy during each breath to exchange carbon dioxide for oxygen. Without entropy animals die quickly. Eve would have died before she could have talked to a snake had their been no entropy.  

Entropy is fundamental to life and operation of the entire universe, so don't be calling God evil for the way He made this universe and it's life.   In every scenario of the universe that you have called out, a set of laws that increase entropy would have to exist just to live, breathe and eat:  The Young Earth Creationist version or evolutionary versions starting billions of years ago.  

Notice the growth of plants, animals and man's desire to eat fruit even before the fall occurred.  The fact that there were three rivers near Eden shows there was entropy before the fall since rivers are a by-product of erosion that is based on entropy.  The fact that the illuminates were present on Day 4 providing natural light for growing plants is the result of entropy (hydrogen atoms decaying to a lower energy level on the sun's surface and producing photons of light that arrive on earth minutes later). Natural processes occurring every day of the Creation 'Week' fundamentally depended on Entropy whether it was the YE version or one of the evolutionary versions.  God saw that it was good because entropy produces life as well as death.  Otherwise, existence would have been not good, non-evolving, frozen in time and not accomplishing His will.  

God knows a lot more about the necessity of entropy to all living things than you do so cut Him and the rest of us some slack before you judge us as evil.   Entropy, death, and life is fundamental to this world as well as causation, birth of new life, development, learning and acquiring wisdom. If you would try studying about how this world actually works you would know this and I wouldn't have to waste my time having to tell you about it, and waste other people's time writing to you about it. 

You are a unformed piece of clay trying to tell the potter how to make His universe while having little to no understanding at all of how his present creation works. 

I have been trying to help with your understanding but you continue to insult and belittle all my descriptions of how nature operates. I thought you might understand that what I wrote and how it would apply to your post but again it seems I have overestimated your potential for comprehension. I am not certain how rudimentary my descriptions must be  for you to grasp them; I am trying very hard not to bore our limited readership and feel I cannot spoon feed you much more than I already do.  You need to study some on your own, please learn something about entropy and quit generating red herrings that are fiction that also waste our time.  Study and think about what you state before posting.  

I hope you can see now just how pertinent my post was after yours.  But if you need more explanation just ask, I can hardly wait for your reply.  I just can't let you get by with making erroneous statements on this blog. 

The following verse comes to mind relating to what just transpired:  

Matthew 7:6 Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces. 

Prayer- 'God, Maybe I should stop trying to help him with his lack of understanding of this creation since he attempts to rip me apart each time.'

[God]- No, he needs your help! Have patience!

A Blind Old Man The Still Sees Fairly Well (20-20 )

Well done you old confused man.
You just wasted everybody's time with a full blown paragraph on entropy.
I never said entropy is evil. You must be blind.
Read the blooming post, and argue against what I actually said,
not words that you dreamed up!

All,
I just wanted to report to you my local paper's headlines and short summary today since they are tracking this case that Stu is defending. I am surprised this make headlines everywhere.

Headline: Voldemort Is Back
By: I Am Watchin
Text: Voldemort (Tom Marvalo Riddle) returns in the form of a shape shifting horcrux that Harry Potter didn't discover. Voltemort was discovered impersonating several witnesses at the Department of Magical Law Enforcement underneath London where the Ministry of Justice is conducting a trail on the traditional view of magical creationism where the defense claim animals, humans, and plants were popped into existance instantaneously by God. The defense attorney Stu has been calling witnesses which were being impersonated by the shape shifter Voldemort. When discovered by court security in trying to sneek through a hidden wand, he turned into a cloud of smoke and disappeared. However, before departing he said He will be back to impersonate other witnesses because he loves the deception, the magic of instantaneous creation, and posing as a resurrected saint that died millenia ago. There is no information yet whether the defense was complicit in Voldemort's involvement in the trial and the testimony provided, but observers claim they are highly suspicious. For unknown reasons Judge Solomon was not concerned by this discovery and is allowing the trial to continue. Some of the Ministry of Justice officials are now concerned that the Judge may be a shape shifter also and part of a larger scheme. Efforts by Scotland Yard to track down this trail have proven fruitless as they cannot find the location of Defense Attorney Stu, Judge, or the Court under London. More to come as facts become available.

Watchin Out for You

There you have it, this is fraudulent trial and not worth your time except for the entertainment value. Please get out of there Stu before Voldemort gets you or worse yet before God terminates the fraudulent trial.

Dave,

I for one, am glad to see you entering back into the discussion. Although a little overdue, since we had months of discussion on this topic years ago, your input is greatly appreciated and valued. One of comments that I want to address is below:

[Dave] - 'You can't claim to have an all-powerful God and then limit his omnipotence by claiming he has to comply with fixed laws of the universe He created....It's neat to debate which direction the evidence tips in with respect to the age of the Earth and the universe, but when it includes dogmatic statements claiming to "know" that God has kept all of his physical laws, we claim to know the mind of God. Scripture says His ways are not our ways and they are higher than ours, remember?'

The only reason that I have claimed that God uses fixed laws is because He claims he uses fixed laws. Je 33:25, Job 38:4, Job 38:33. Of course, He can change the laws, but He states that He made the laws fixed. This has nothing to do, with my thinking I know the mind of God, but has a lot to do with carefully studying the Bible, believing everything He said, and integrating it together into an honest and truthful picture of the world and God's larger reality. It seems to be our challenge to figure out as best we can how He can accomplish miracles using these laws and how His marvelous creation really works. I have only been trying to describe my views on how He does it using the existing laws and describing how these laws give Him the control that He needs. I don't think you have read all my posts, otherwise you wouldn't have made this remark. You would have seen that the existing physical laws and their independent control variables provide virtually total control to the point where changing the physical laws are unnecessary to accomplish most of the miracles in the Bible. If you want me to point out these posts to you just let me know.

Another, claim that you made was that the sun wasn't created until the fourth day and it was God's light produced on the first day. I was wondering what your rationale was for not including the sun as part of the heavens made on 'Day' 1. Your analysis shows that the earth and the stars were made on 'Day' 1. Your analysis seems to permit a clear view of the stars, and moon through the atmosphere on Day 4 so why couldn't the sun also have been viewable and hidden before by clouds in the atmosphere for instance?

I may have some more comments later but I wanted to get back to you quickly on these.

Lee

Ruling on the Mock Trial

Judge: Will the Defense approach the bench. The plaintiff has charged that this trial is a mockery of Jesus and Christianity; a farce; a shameless, reckless encounter contrary to God's law. He has accused you personally of distortions of the truth; calling imposters to the witness stand; fabricating truth and using deceitful practices.

Defense: These are substantive allegations. But I must remind the Court that it is the plaintiff who brought the charges against the Church and its traditional interpretation of Scripture. On July 7 the plaintiff wrote that David, Paul and Moses really meant by what they wrote:

"I knit Adam's genetic code together first (Ps 139:13, 1 Tim 2:13) in his subhuman mother which bore him naturally and raised him to maturity. I then knit together Eve's genetic code (Ps 139:13) who was later born naturally (Ge 4:1 NET). Later as she matured, she became a companion and a helper for Adam (Ge 2:18-20)."

And then on July 22 the plaintiff said that Moses, Job's scribe, and Jeremiah actually meant by what they wrote: "The necessary organic materials to produce Adam naturally through evolution from sub-humans required ... a few million years to build up the monkey genetic code to human code (Ge 1:27). We started with monkey genetic code many generations earlier, but you are nothing like your early primitive relative's (Jb 39:17, Je 1:5) Coco and Bongo or your previously unnamed subhuman relatives, Ad and Eek. (bolding added)."

I must ask the Court, who is making a mockery (or should I say monkey) out of this trial? For millennia the Church has interpreted the Scripture in the traditional manner. As the Defense attorney I have every right to call the original writers of Scripture to the stand to testify to what they said. And I must be given the freedom to explore with them what they meant by what they said. For example, Moses. What did he mean when he said in Gen 1:27 that, "God created man in his own image." The plaintiff insists that he meant that God built up monkey genetic code to human code. The Church says that interpretation is an abomination. I must be given the freedom to prove that it is by having a dialog with Moses.

Judge: Since the plaintiff has not withdrawn his charges against the Church, nor forfeited his case, I rule that the trial continue. The Defense may call its next witness.

This is a repost of the dig I did into Gen 1 looking for creation words. Interested in where I have gone wrong if you believe I am off in my interpretation.

My point with this post is to say that we don't know how old the earth is, and to deny everything we observe because we want to use one interpretation of Yom is a bit dangerous and undermines our credibility for nothing. of course, the Earth could be 6,000 years old, or 15 minutes old, what I think matters is how old does it appear to be and can the Bible be interpreted honestly to reach the same conclusion.

How Old is the Earth? A Word Study Through Genesis 1

Here is what I believe concerning Genesis 1 and how it can match up with what science is observing. I have to say at the outset, this is what I think is true based on what I study and observe. I wasn’t there at the time, so it could have been different. However, as you will hopefully see, there is room in my opinions for things to be either way, which is how I think God wanted it. If he really wanted us to major in the Earth being 5 Billion years old or 6,000 years old, he would have said, “the Earth is x years old” in the Bible. But he didn’t.

So here we go…

Moses’ Genesis Account: How Did He Find Out?

The first question I think we should ask when we consider Moses’ Genesis Account is “How did he learn this?”. We know it was given by inspiration of God 2 Tim 3:16, but in these cases where we are offered accounts of what happened, how did God provide the information to Moses? I think if you read Chapter 1, we receive some clues. I have to say, I believe this to be the right way to look at this, but it is a “disputable matter” in my mind (Romans 14:1). Not that God did it all (which is NOT disputable) but how he did it. Just as important, how he did it CANNOT disagree with what scripture says; not at all. So how do I get to an old Earth in this case?

Moses’ perspective in receiving God’s Revelation of Creation

When you read Genesis 1, you get the sense that God revealed his creation activity through a vision and with Moses’ perspective being on the Earth. The vision is consistent with how God has shown big future events to the prophets, why not the past? Certainly it had to come some way, because literally no one but God was there. So it was either a vision or dictation of some sort. I think the vision is easier to believe.

With the exception of Day 1 where it seems God showed Moses a “formless, dark Earth” with waters covering everything and God’s spirit “hovering” (“rachaph” in Hebrew which also has a brooding connotation), the rest of the account is from the Earth perspective. Concerning the words he used; Moses also used a word that could mean “became” formless and void in Gen 1:2. So at this point you could honestly ask (without violating inerrancy or straining interpretations):

• Where did the water come from?
• If the word is “became” formless and void, could it have been there before God began this current process of creation?
• Why the word rachaph? Why could God be brooding over the surface of the deep?

None of this is conclusive, but it could mean something. So let’s keep going.

Day 1

Moses watches God reveal light over the “deep” and separate darkness from light. He had to see this somehow. He also saw “evening” then “morning” and the first day. Day is Yom, but I can’t understand how this must a 24 hour day if we assume the Sun hasn’t been created yet. Of course, God could have a good reason for why he would spend 24 hours doing this, but it wouldn’t be because of the Earth’s rotation before the sun. If the sun was there, it isn’t likely Moses could have seen it 1) because God’s light was what God wanted him to see and 2) the waters dominated the landscape (no sky yet). This was clearly God’s Light (see Rev 22:5) and the only constraint on the time here would be to superimpose a rotation of the Earth into and away from God’s light over a 24 hour period. If Yom here is a literal day (which is what it could be) then I believe that is exactly what God caused to happen. If yom is not meaning a 24 day, then I believe this could have taken as long as God wanted it to. However, and this is important, to Moses, calling it a “day” was logical, especially since he experienced an evening and morning. God wanted him to record it this way. Being honest, and accounting for God’s omnipotence, it could have been 24 hours or a longer period of time.

Day 2

Here God placed air (the Expanse, or sky) between the upper waters and the lower waters. At some point in the Earth’s early history (before the flood) there was water above the surface of the earth. How deep was this water? Can you see through water that is deep? Assuming even the purest of water, you can’t much through deeper than 50 feet of water or so. Could it be this shielded the celestial bodies from his view? I think it did.

Day 3

God then allowed dry land to show and gathered the waters into seas. Once again, Moses seems to be offering an account of what he saw. All by inspiration of God. He then had the land “produce” [dasha] or sprout vegetation. Interestingly, God doesn’t use either of his creation words in this portion of scripture, bara or asah. Could he already have created vegetation before then? Perhaps vegetation was already made before, and it is much older than this creation? Perhaps God just caused it to grow again once he revealed dry land? One thing for certain; the Sun wasn’t available yet for photosynthesis, so God’s light must have served that purpose.

Another thing; there is no implication here this was the first time there was vegetation on the Earth. It doesn’t say there was either. But it leaves open the possibility for there to have been vegetation on the Earth before then.

How long was this? The same presentation goes for this as for day one. Moses perceived it as a day, but if the Sun doesn’t exist yet, it doesn’t seem that it has to be a 24 hour day. It could be a 24 hour day though in my mind, accounting for God’s omnipotence.

Day 4

On this day, God revealed the lights in the expanse of the sky and states their purpose. I believe all of this is literal, but it is important to remember how God had inspired Moses to record this event.

The usage of “bara” and “asah”

There are two words used in Hebrew for made here, bara and asah. Bara is very clear; it usually means “created from nothing”. Asah is a much more flexible word, and can mean everything from do, make accomplish, achieve, acquire, etc.

interestingly, the word “bara” does not occur in day 3 at all. The governing lights, the Sun and Moon, come with the word “asah”. Why such careful choice of words? If God meant to have it be perfectly clear that was the exact point in time he created these bodies, he would have Moses use the more definitive word. I personally believe he revealed these Governing Lights to Moses at this time, and Moses used the best word to describe his experience. He didn’t know for certain God created them then from nothing, but he knew they just arrived, and he knew their purpose going forward. That is certainly the focus of Moses’ account at that point.

One more thing; the reference to the stars [kokab] in verse 16 is a standalone and an aside it seems. The stars clearly weren’t made to separate darkness from light; verse 17 references the first half of verse 16, not the stars. So why did Moses leave the stars observation as a separate observation? Once again, the stars appeared to him at the same time as the governing lights, and only when the Moon was revealed. Once again, stronger words could have been used here if he meant it to be obvious, like Genesis 1:1, but he chose less definitive words.

At this point, it is more likely than before the days were 24 hour periods, because God said the new lights would be used to “govern” [mashal] or to reign over, have dominion. I think it is logical to think these could be 24 hour days from here on out, but once again, allowing for God’s omnipotence, it could mean longer periods of time.

Day 5 – Back to Bara

On Day 5, God created [bara] the birds, “great sea monsters and every living creature that moves” [NASB]. Seems pretty clear; God created them. How? Moses doesn’t say in detail. This obviously leaves open the potential for our own conclusions and biases to come into play. One thing is very likely; we can’t picture it.

Could this have happened over a long time or a short time? Once again, either one, but God had already made the lights to govern at this point, so it is logical to assume a 24 hour day. How did God do this in 24 hours? I have no idea. I plan to ask him (not Moses) when all of this is over and done with.

Day 6

On this day, God creates all the land dwelling animals and man and woman. This is interesting. For the animals, Moses uses asah; for man, he uses both, and in the place where he wanted it to be abundantly clear he did it [verse 27], he uses bara. For me, this doesn’t indicate evolution. However, God did it at that time. There is no use of the word immediately, and Moses does not elaborate, so we can’t know for sure, but I personally lean toward some kind of immediate event. The account of the creation of Eve supports that view as well.

One thing to think about here; if God paraded all of the animals before Adam to name them, how did this happen in one 24 hour day? It could have, by some kind of divine enablement, but Adam would have been quite different than we are to be able to do this. Since this was before The Fall, Adam may have been different, but once again, we are guessing. It may be that this was a longer period of time. I lean toward a different Adam (who was perhaps smarter and quicker? than us) but once again, not something to be dogmatic about because Moses doesn’t further elaborate and God was comfortable with that. Perhaps the diversity of species was much smaller than it is today, which would make sense. You wouldn't have to have macroevolution in that case, but then again, God could have guided it.

In any event, interested in what you all think.

Seems like it may be a bit dramatic to say?

Don't forget Lee, the universe is not a closed system when it comes to God. As CS Lewis says in "Miracles", you can't claim to fully understand the behavior of a system when there is a third party acting upon in in unknowable ways.

You can't claim to have an all-powerful God and then limit his omnipotence by claiming he has to comply with fixed laws of the universe He created. You either have a God who CAN'T do anything He wants (clearly not scriptural) or you have a God who can act as He pleases, and does from time to time to show us all that He is God and we are not.

It's neat to debate which direction the evidence tips in with respect to the age of the Earth and the universe, but when it includes dogmatic statements claiming to "know" that God has kept all of his physical laws, we claim to know the mind of God. Scripture says His ways are not our ways and they are higher than ours, remember?

Taking this one step further, our physican description of the universe would HAVE to be incomplete if you are correct. If God does miracles, and the miracles must conform to His physical laws, then there are physical laws we do not yet understand, and some of which MUST abridge our current scientific understanding. The mere concept of God being "omnipresent" does not make physical sense in our world.

Update: As I read through the thread, I note that others seem to still be claiming the Earth is absolutely young. Also not necessarily scriptural. The Bible does not require one to believe the Earth is young unless you force the interpretation of a number of Hebrew words in Gen 1.

Just landed in Boston, saw this in my inbox and couldn't resist...

God does what He pleases,He could have created everything any way that is consistent with His charater and His Word. After that, we are all just guessing.

Just saying.

Lucien and Stu,
By continuing this mock trial, you are making a mockery of Jesus, Luke, and Moses. You are also making a mockery of Christianity as well. Let the original verses stand without putting words in our saint's mouths and pretending they are speaking to us from the dead or from Heaven. Please stop this deceitful practice and fraudulent dialogue! God is the only one with the right to put words and thoughts into his creations. Stu, you shouldn't be creating their thoughts for them in your posts. This mock trial is so disturbing that I don't even want respond your individual distortions of the truth made by your imposters. I can't believe that you have continued this farce. This is shameful, wreckless, and counter to God's laws (sin)!

Also, you both seem to be disagreeing with the way God actually created the universe and dragging the names of Moses, Luke and Jesus into it, so I thought I should remind you of the potential consequences of your complaints and deceitful statements fraudulently put forth by your mock saints of our faith. 

Isaiah 45:9 One who argues with his creator is in grave danger, one who is like a mere shard among the other shards on the ground! The clay should not say to the potter, "What in the world are you doing? Your work lacks skill!" 10Danger awaits one who says to his father, "What in the world are you fathering?" and to his mother, "What in the world are you bringing forth?" ... 12 I made the earth, I created the people who live on it. It was me - my hands stretched out the sky, I give orders to all the heavenly lights. ...18 For this is what the LORD says, the one who created the sky -  he is the true God, the one who formed the earth and made it; he established it, he did not create it without order, he formed it to be inhabited -  "I am the LORD, I have no peer. 

Lucien, by claiming that entropy is evil ('the god of this evolution as an ogre and merciless murderer of billions of various creatures'), you appear to disagree with 1) his desires to include entropy (Rom 8:20), 2) with His statement that He formed the universe with order (Is 45:18) and 3) used fixed laws (Je 33:25).  These latter two aspects of nature combined cause an increase in entropy (or disorder to increase).  Every physical thing in our universe is affected by this.  This increasing entropy is the foundation for virtually all natural processes that exist. Mental processes involving organization, design and manufacture being one of the few exceptions that result in the increase of a localized order improvement and a local decrease in entropy. The ongoing entropy increase that followed the very low initial value in the beginning is what drives all physical processes. If God would have stopped entropy from increasing by suspending His laws, the universe and all of its activities would have also stopped.  There wouldn't have been the first six days of creation without entropy. There wouldn't have been any light without entropy since it is produced by the entropic flow of heat out of stars or other hot material. This would not have been good. Entropy permits life to occur, it would have died or been non-functional frozen molecules otherwise.  Every form of life functions based upon the increase of entropy as they receive energy or food with a lower entropy and dispose of waste products at a higher entropy . Entropy drives the arrow of time in one direction. It is a consequence of the laws and order that God created that drives the entropy and it serves an important function in this universe. Entropy didn't start on the last day of creation, it was there all along from the instant the universe started to exist. All of our scientific evidence confirms this. When you claim, the entropy didn't start until the fall, you are revealing your lack of understanding and wisdom. The fall didn't start this process, God started it when He spoke everything into existence in the Big Bang at an ultra low entropy level. Your discussion is confirming that Christians are debating foolishness and your mock trial is making a mockery out of all Christianity.

Lee

Lee,


we have established the above.
But neither is the word "subhuman". Anyone could easily challenge you to point out in the Bible where subhuman people (Adam and/or Eve's parents) people are referenced.

Also, if Adam was only tens of thousands of years ago, how do you marry this with the Flood at 10,000-40,000 years ago?


Lucien

Bret,

What you have dispensed with so casually and claimed is grasping at straws is what God actually states as the way that He has created everything. You also label God's statements as cryptic support for evolution. I thought He was very clear in His statements: preplanned each one of us, generation after generation, made everyone of us, knit us together in our mother's womb and made each descendent unique to accomplish His purpose. I don't know how you get a cryptic case for evolution out of this. He also never says anywhere in the Bible that He popped any plant animal or human into existance instantaneously. It seems to me that you are the one grasping at straws. I wouldn't treat it so lightly as you do. Don't you believe God? Please don't be confused by your preconceived notions of creation, this is not the path to wisdom. If you would like to go through each verse to discuss what each is stating since you disagree with it, fine, but please don't ignore what God actually said, it won't turn out well for you.

I address the verses you use as support for popping things into existance instantaneously in the following paragraphs.

1 Cor 11:8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

God knew before creation was initiated that He would have to produce a female for Adam, she was one of the primary goals of creation to produce offspring and co-heirs along with Jesus. God's plan called for the first human to be a male with Eve the first woman to follow from similar but altered genetic code. He knew that she would need to be his equal and to have the ability to help him. So this verse also applies if we look at the creation of a spiritual Eve from God's perspective of applying changes to the genetic code of a subhuman after He created Adam to produce a spiritually gifted female human and similar to Adam in mental and physical characteristics except being female. As long as Eve's genetic code was modified by God from some of Adam's subhuman's ancestral family to make a spiritual equivalent of Adam that was female and made to be a desirable companion for him , Eve's creation would comply with this verse.

Ge 2:19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;

Notice the past tense of the word 'formed'; this means it could have happened (if they were real entities instead of symbolic ones) 'days' (Hebrew 'yowms' or quite likely eons of human time) earlier in God's creation sequence. The Ge 1 account describes these same animals and plants being formed on different 'yowms' which forces us to conclude it happened earlier in history otherwise Ge 1 would be wrong. Ge 1 also tells us that the earth and waters bring the plants and animals forth according to their kind. Bringing forth is an expression used in the Bible typically meaning natural birth by a mother. It is even used by Luke and Mathew to describe the birth of Jesus by Mary.

So which is it? Popping plants and animals from the dust of the ground instantaneously, as you conjecture, or for the earth to bring each animal forth generation after generation according to its kind and evolving new species using natural processes that God controls to knit each being uniquely in its mother's womb. I say that it must be the natural process which science supports and God supports in His Word (which I've provided references to in my last post) to avoid inerrancy of the Bible. It seems to me that must look at Ge 2 & 3 from a spiritual design and development perspective to maintain this inerrancy. Otherwise Ge 1 conflicts with Ge 2 from a time sequence perspective and from the perspective of material objects like a 1) tree of life, 2) a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, 3) a deceitful talking knowledgeable snake, and 4) angels with whirling swords of flame that never existed or could ever exist materially in this universe. These were metaphors of immaterial concepts for spiritual entities like 1) eternal spiritual existance with God, 2) gaining knowledge of the effects of sinful behavior, 3) Satan, and 4)separation from God and His blessings resulting from disobedience. These things are not made of physical matter and never existed on this earth. You need to integrate the entire message of the Bible into your beliefs and not just a few convenient phrases that support imagined concepts that are conflict with other verses.

Ge 2:21 (AMP) And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam; and while he slept, He took one of his ribs or a part of his side and closed up the [place with] flesh. 22And the rib or part of his side which the Lord God had taken from the man He built up and made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

This verse is symbolic to me of God's examining tissue containing genetic code of Adam while He was unaware of it and transferring the appropriate changes into Eve's genetic code to give her understanding as she was built in her subhuman mother's womb. Of course this was planned before the beginning of creation, so Adam was indeed totally unaware. I've described already why much of Ge 2 is symbolic of spiritual design and creation and not physical creation.

Mark 10:6 (KJV) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

If you read the verses surrounding this one, you will quickly see that the context is about divorce between a man and a woman. Jesus was clearly addressing only men and women in the above verse. So the beginning of the creation referenced in this verse is from the beginning of Adam's and Eve's creation which is only tens of thousands of human years ago.

In conclusion, I thought YEs could do better than that Bret. Can't the YE organization help you out on this. There must be more than one verse in the entire Bible that helps you support your weak case. Don't you have some better rationale than what you have so far stated for believing the God popped all the animals and plants into existance instantaneously including Adam and Eve. The only verse you have produced so far is Ge 2:19. This verse and many of the surrounding verses must be symbolic of the non-material spiritual world to avoid conflicts with Ge 1 history and other statements which I previously described starting in late January. Ge 1 describes the physical creation of the world and its evolution of characteristics and life forms. The sequence of events in it are also scientifically proven historically and analytically. We know that Ge 1 is the historical account, not Ge 2. Ge 2 must be written from a different perspective other than the material world perspective. Because of this, the Ge 2 account cannot represent the physical creation of Adam and Eve.

Lee

Dear Stuart,

please reconsider the following:
"Moses: Well, to his credit the plaintiff's version of evolution is a significant improvement over the atheistic Darwinist's version in that he defines evolution as being God directed. God does have a plan and purpose for creating mankind. This version of evolution is also wrong, but it is better than the Darwinian version which denies God's direction altogether. "

God did NOT design long periods of millions of years full of death, disease and suffering of the creatures that were allegedly living during those eons of time!
So if evolution is to be considered at all, the atheistic version is the more plausible version, as the theistic one depicts the god of this evolution as an ogre and merciless murderer of billions of various creatures.
This is NOT good. In fact, any engineer/designer setting up such a scheme should be branded as EVIL and most certainly not have names as 'the life', 'the good shepherd', 'bread of life' 'holy one', 'prince of peace', 'wonderful'.

Theistic evolution flies in the face of our good God and I predict proponents will get a hard time when face to face with their maker...

Lucien