11

I'm very hesitant to answer anything on this as no matter what position I take, it will incite endless debate and comments. However, I believe there is a simple answer that all sides can hold as acceptable truth. The fact is that we all have the same evidence. Whether Atheist, Christian, Buddhist, Wiccan, YEC, OEC, the evidence never changes. The ...


10

There is no reason to limit information about the creation week to Genesis, but... 1) There are a number of good reasons to limit information about the creation week to Scripture. For instance, philosophically, the word of God is truth, and all men are corrupt and limited, which makes the revealed word of God the only reliable source for truth. 2) There is ...


9

Since you pinged me on chat about this, I'll do my best to answer... But honestly, I think it's a very poor question. Therefore, I provide two answers: The one I think you're looking for, and what I believe is the proper answer. I think an OEC who uses this verse as a proof text is using it in the sense that to God time measurement is essentially ...


8

I think it's clear that your assumption is wrong, and that figurative interpretations of the Genesis were always common amongst scholarly interpreters, such as for example St. Augustine. At the very least, he thinks that the transgression in the Garden of Eden was in fact of a sexual nature, and therefore the account as it is, is figurative. Further, we are ...


8

The primary argument against the day age theory is from the Hebrew Grammer. The word Yom is translated day in this passage, and in different contexts it can mean different things. In 67 verses in the Old Testament, the word Yom is translated into the English word "time." (Genesis 4:3, I Kings 11:42) Four times in the Old Testament Yom is translated "year....


6

For the sake of not getting into an argument, let's assume a genesis / biblical creation, literal/YEC-style. The "trees/rings" thing is pretty much unanswerable, but fortunately we don't even need to know anything about the garden of Eden / Adam, because what we do have is the light from other stars, for which we have good confidence for the distance / ...


5

Here's one answer (emphasis added): In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Professor William Henry Green and theologian Benjamin B. Warfield noted gaps and omissions in the Genesis genealogies. This suggested the creation was conceivably older than the 6,000-year timeframe proposed by Ussher and Lightfoot. Today many Bible scholars believe the ...


5

Short answer: We do need to look at all verses describing creation. But we need to know when creation 'the process' is being talked about and when creation as in 'the physical universe' is being talked about. I encourage you to search the scripture for the phrase "since the beginning of creation" and you will always find human observers being talked about. ...


5

I'm going to say that he probably couldn't. Naturally, I admit the very real possibility of being wrong. I use Occam's Razor when it comes to determining which scenario is more likely. There are similar questions to "Did the first trees have rings (correlating to actual years of existence)?" Did Adam and Even have navels? It's impossible to say for sure, ...


5

If we go back to the earliest Christian teachers we will find a substantial focus on metaphorical and spiritual meanings of the Bible, more than maybe a modern Christian might expect. Roger Forster and Paul Marston write in "Reason and Faith" (Monarch, 1989): In [the Church Fathers] there was, compared with today, a much greater emphasis on ...


4

Short answer - YES! Long answer - read below :) You will find many science based articles that answer this question at creation.com . I am a recently converted atheist who was unable to reconcile evolution with the bible as a literal account. I believed the evolution account for 40 years. The reason I no longer believe it is because I had an experience ...


4

Your main question prompts me to respond quite simply – “There are lots of arguments that life on earth was NOT created deliberately by one called the Logos” (who, the Bible informs us, later became the man Jesus Christ.) That is because many people who try to formulate arguments about life arising on earth make zero mention of even the possibility of a ...


4

Reasons to Believe is an organization which presents arguments in favor of Old Earth Creation, and on their Who We Are page, founder Hugh Ross states: One of the approaches I've developed, with the help of my RTB colleagues, is a biblical creation model that is testable, falsifiable, and predictive. Their web site offers an overview of their "falsifiable"...


4

If you don't mind me referencing Rashi, a French Medieval rabbi, his understanding of Genesis 1:30 makes note that both humans and animals were on the same footing with regard to food. Nothing is explicitly stated about how both humans and animals before the fall would otherwise acquire their nutrients, i.e., if humans were omnivores and if carnivores were ...


3

Creationists rarely think about the planets of the solar system. As we see at a site that calls itself YEC Headquarters, science is likely to "redefine the truth", and planets tend to make science the focus of discussion. This YEC site does not tell us what Young Earth Creationists think did happen, but only that scientists are wrong about the origin of the ...


3

Creationists do sometimes make falsifiable theories and predictions, but I want to note first that: These predictions are not universally held among all creationists, or depending on the theory even relatively common They are based on assumptions that are not derived from scripture and which are not even logically required by the idea of creationism or even ...


3

Different groups of Christians resolve this in different ways. A young-earth creationist would say the earth isn't really 4.5 billion years old. Adam and Eve were created along with everything else around 6,000 years ago. An old-earth creationist would accept the 4.5 billion year age of the earth, but would deny that humans are descended from another ...


2

Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology (295ff.) lays out several arguments against the day age view, the most significant of which are: the "evening" and "morning" language of Genesis 1 plants (created third day) need sunshine (created fourth day) to survive the Sabbath commandment Evening and morning. Several times in the Genesis 1 ...


2

One way is through the Framework view of Genesis which arises from the Panbabylonian theory for the inspiration for Genesis. This is in contrast to the Gap and Day-Age theories of Genesis. This view puts forth a literal reading of Genesis, while maintaining that the account of Genesis is not what actually occurred. This view is more concerned with Genesis ...


2

The Wikipedia article on Young Earth Creationism gives a good explanation of it's origins, decline, and revival. Regarding the age of the earth, it cites Seder Olam Rabbah from 160 AD: The earliest post-exilic Jewish chronicle preserved in the Hebrew language, the Seder Olam Rabbah compiled by Jose ben Halafta in 160 AD, dates the creation of the world to ...


2

There is no biblical reason to limit information about creation to Genesis. If it's in the Bible but not in Genesis, it's still in the Bible! And, as a philosophical point, anyone who reads any of these answers is already going outside of the Bible and thereby relying on our extra-biblical interpretations of Genesis or of the Bible as a whole, so the same ...


2

Between AD 389-417 Augustine wrote three commentaries on Genesis and discussed the early chapters of Genesis in The City of God. Augustine believed the genealogies given in Genesis to be literal chronologies and that the pre-Flood patriarchs lived to be around 900 years. He stated: “Unbelievers are also deceived by false documents which ascribe to ...


2

I'd encourage you to give a listen to William Lane Craigs 'Defenders' podcast series on Creation and Evolution, specifically episode 14 which touches on this (but the prior 13 episodes provide background info). This is probably the most erudite, methodical, and approachable analysis that I've ever come across on this subject. There are several issues ...


2

As a young Earth creationist I see it this way: God stretched out the heavens like a curtain on Day 4 (Isaiah 42:5) causing time dilation; generating billions of years' worth of starlight into the heavens in 24 hours of Earth time; to establish a clock that could run forever and be seen from the Earth from the beginning.(Genesis 1:14) God caused a ...


1

The best way for me to answer this as a Day Age person is to quote from my main go to guy on the topic, Hugh Ross so I'm going to quote from one of his articles. Was Evil Present in God's Very Good World If you read the full article you will notice that Ross shows that the Bible uses the words Good and very good in both a moral sense, as well as in the ...


1

Just glimpsing at the question, there are inherent falsifiable things in "creationism". I am going to use a Hypothesis / Falsifiable argument format H: Life comes from life F: If a non-living (rock) thing becomes alive H: Living animals cannot change their kind through reproduction F: If a cat breeds with another cat, and produces a non-cat (like a pig) ...


1

A fundamental tenet of Christian belief is that God created the world, with the primary evidence for this found in the Book of Genesis. What is usually meant by Creationism is not so much about whether this is read literally or symbolically, but about creating a "science" that can be put alongside the science of evolution and therefore defend the ...


1

To address the reciprocal premise, there is actually Biblical evidence not to limit our understanding of the texts to the texts themselves. For example, Jesus and the Apostles frequently referenced and quoted other writings - apocraphyal or Duterocanonical, pseudoepigraphical and other works. If we want to truly understand the teachings of Jesus and the ...


1

I think, quite simply, old Earth creationists are trying to reconcile a belief in the Bible with evolutionary theory. It is difficult to see how anyone could read Genesis without any previously conceived ideas and conclude that the Earth is billions of years old. The plain, literal meaning is that the Earth was created in six 24-hour days several thousand ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible