Young Earth Creationism (YEC)

Heres another point. The Genesis account fits the scientific chronology of how the universe and earth were formed.
Ie when the spirit of god was hovering over the surface of the deep and darkness and water was all that there was . The science shows that all planets start on this way . A watery mass. There’s more I’ll mention later if anyone is interested.

1 Like

Good point. How old was Adam on the day he was created? Only He and Eve never had to grow up to be adults, they were old when they were created. How old? Could be any span of time, we only know that it was on the sixth day, man’s day, that he was formed.

1 Like

Hope that’s all ok now Sean sorry about that

1 Like

@Bronie Haven’t been keeping up with this thread, but thanks for sharing your thoughts Bronie :slight_smile:

Great points . While it is irrelevant as far as salvation goes. I personally don’t care how old the earth is because I’m saved . But this fact does hinder those who don’t know Christ and think that the bible teaches YEC. Interesting fact ‘There is not one scientist outside Christianity who believes the earth is young. ‘So it would appear to them that Christianity contradicts the scientific evidence and this would be I would suggest hinder them from considering Christ . I’ve worked with these people in the teaching field and it is hard to share with them if you retain a YEC viewpoint. Moreover we live in a world where many people just believe there isn’t a God. They vehemently suggest that science disproves him. How can we get them to John 3.16 if we can’t get them past genesis?? In Australia the salvation soil is even harder than in America. At least you gave a heritage to draw from.
X Bronie

2 Likes

I am in the YEC camp as well. The ‘there was evening and there was morning’ behind each day leads me to believe that ‘day’ is a 24-hour day. Also, I cannot get past the passage in Exodus in which God tells Moses to tell the people that He made everything in six days and rested the seventh (Ex. 20:11).

As for the science (as it pertains to testing the age of the Universe/Earth), I simply do not trust the math that is used to determine the age; I believe there is something missing.

2 Likes

How would we know how old anything is if it preexisted recorded history? We judge the cause by the effect. By looking at the laws that currently govern our universe such as gravity, and extrapolating them back in time, we come up with an educated guéss. But what.if those laws are not universal? What if even time itself is warped by gravity? Or what about a cataclysmic event such as a worldwide flood? Then we might not be so sure of our estimates.

2 Likes

I’ve never considered this question actually.
I suppose he would be one earth day old chronologically (regardless if you are YEC or day-age perspective; I’m still currently in the YEC camp at this stage) - although presumably as a fully formed adult. Also consider that before the fall, God has created mankind to live forever; only when sin entered the picture did Adam start to physically die and age as we know it today.

Great thought Dean to bring up. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hi Bronie,
I also am a young earth creationist, but feel when trying to reach people and get them to question their worldview it can become an evolution vs creation or a science vs religion argument (a lot of secular atheism in Australia; I live in Aus :slight_smile: ), I go back to the question of origins.

You can simply ask them the two part question on origins and see if they believe in a self creating universe (a logical impossibility as Lennox points out here: https://www.rzim.org/read/just-thinking-magazine/stephen-hawking-and-god).

Origin:
How do you think the universe came into existence?
How do you think human life began?

Meaning:
What is the purpose of human life?

Morality:
How do you determine good and bad?

Destiny:
What will happen at the end (at death)?

Not sure if you’ve seen it but there are some nice short ‘make people think’ videos here (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3gdeV4Rk9EfL-NyraEGXXwSjDNeMaRoX)

Another short book which might be used as an outreach tool to a friend is John Lennox book ‘Can science explain everything?’; it’s a well written book and would be great for a skeptic who is worried about having to choose between science and God. Lennox proves both are true. It’s not an either or.

I don’t think we have to know all the answers; perhaps just enough questions to ask someone else to make them think about whether there is a God, and has he revealed himself through the person of Jesus Christ. Like the sower, we just try and plant some seeds, and leave it to the Holy Spirit to convict of sin, righteousness and judgment.
Hope that helps… :slight_smile:
Kind regards
Matt

1 Like

Hi Mat I appreciate the clips , thanks :pray:.they are very usable. I agree all these arguments are great. The first one is the most powerful I find in this very argumentative world. .While from a yec view you could use it. it is using scientific evidence which equates to the universe being billions of years old so it’s only really convincing, I believe if you believe it to be true. Thanks for the clips

Cheers Bronie

1 Like

Hi Dean hey you make some good points . Here is a couple of things to consider . Astronomy is unique amongst the sciences in the fact that it directly access the past . When scientists look through the telescopes they are in fact looking back in time. When we look at the sun it takes 8 minutes for the light from the sun to reach us . We are in fact looking at the sun as it was 8 minutes ago. (Looking back in time) Now keeping this in mind . As we continue to look back over the universe we are seeing it at earlier and earlier stages in time. They can now view the universe right at the beginning . The amazing thing is that their observations have identified a beginner. Here is a spacetime Theorem that they came up with .“If mass exists and general relativity reliably predicts cosmic dynamics, then space and time must be created , implying a casual agent who transcends space and time.”(Hawking, Ellis,Penrose)
So astronomy has now shown us that what the bible said is true. The bible is unique amongst the religious texts in that it identifies a creator existing beyond time. So instead of ignoring the science astronomy has shown us we as Christians can use it to reach the lost for Christ. You won’t get a bigger miracle then the beginning of the universe . The reaction by the scientific community has been to point to the miraculous Here is a quote from Steven Hawking in his book a brief history of time ( best selling book in science of all time

“It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun this way except as an act of a God who intended to create beings like us.” Great hey
Hope this has given more insight
Cheers Bronie

A couple of my main concerns with Old Earth Creationism are death before the fall and the problem of evil. Isn’t pain in the world a result of sin? Would a perfectly good God use competition for resources and survival of the fittest as His method for creating animals and man?

3 Likes

Hi Jennifer , interesting question and very thought provoking. One thing to consider though is that in the cycle of life many herbivores need carnivores to ensure their species actually survives. Without the sick or generically weak or indeed the numbers of animals cut down through predatory behaviour the larger herd will eat all their food and starve to death. Those who believe animal death prior to Adams sin implies a cruel God need to consider again what God was willing to suffer for our sake. Nothing was more costly and painful for him than allowing his son to die for all our sins. Jesus’ death was the ultimate expression of Gods love. We also need to consider that Romans 5.12 declares that “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin came to all people. “ By saying “ all people “ rather than “ all life “and by specifying “ death through sin” Paul here clarifies that Adam’s fall did not inaugurate animal death. This verse addresses death through sin not animal death. Another biblical passage 1 Corinthians 15.20-22 also clarifies that the death Adams sin introduced was limited to humans. This text speaks of the resurrection of humans ( in Christ) whose death was sealed “ in Adam “ Nowhere does the Bible claim that plants and animals did not die before Adam sinned. In regard to evil , God has created this world to eradicate evil from the human heart . Unfortunately there was no other way. Once evil is dealt with God will give us a “new heaven and a new earth.”something to look forward to.:grinning:you can find this and more detailed explanations in Dr Hugh Ross’s book “Navigating Genesis”and “A matter of Days. “Cheers

2 Likes

Hi Jonathan . Good point ! Yes Evening and morning are used to frame the days but there is an evening and morning for day 1/2/3/4/5/6 but not seven. Psalm 95, John 5, Hebrews 4.) Refer to us still being in God’s seventh day. This would mean a long period of time. So couldn’t the other days be longer also.
It’s interesting that the word day has 4 literal meanings which the yec answers in Genesis agree can mean a finite long period of time. As for the antiquity of the universe. When we look at the sun it takes 8 min for the light to reach us . So effectively we are looking at the sun as it was 8 min ago. The speed of light does not change. Scripture tells us God has fixed the laws of heaven and earth . This includes the speed of light. It travels at 300000 kms s second and 10 trillions kms in one year. That means in one second light can circle the globe 7 and a half times.
So by looking further and further into space we are effectively looking back in time. I understand where your coming from though . Thought provoking anyway :blush:

I actually don’t see the references to the seventh day in the chapters you gave, at least not in Psalm 95 and John 5 (I’ll reread it again later). Hebrews 4 gave me some pause (for a time), but rereading that passage, I do not see anything that would make me think the seventh day still happening now.

I don’t think that the seventh day not having the evening/morning is too important; I would have a different position if one of the days in between didn’t have that phrase though … God resting on day seven was then end of the creation account (as a general overview of creation); it makes a good breaking point.

“So effectively we are looking at the sun as it was 8 min ago”
What is interesting to me is that evening starts the day. Could it be that this complements the length of time it takes sunlight to travel here?

Hey Jonathan In psalm 95 it refers to “ they shall never enter my rest. “ implying a longer than one 24 hr day period of time . For example Genesis 2.4 “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,” c( check out other versions)

We often use this term like
‘“ The day of the dinosaur or “in my day” In reference to earlier life and it means a long period of time in this context. If you go to Genesis 2 And consider what God did on the sixth day. He made Adam and placed him in the garden to work the garden. He also brought him to “ see all the beasts of the field and the birds .” And asked him to name them all . Adam would have spent time observing the animals before naming them. He then put Adam in a deep sleep and created Eve and then woke Adam up and introduced him to Eve. Adam then says”At long last.” Implying he had waited more then a day or two. ( check out all the different bible versions some omit this phrase in Genesis 23 ) . Have to go sorry will check in later. Cheers Bronie

I am actually writing a paper this semester on this topic as I believe that the best position between the debate is to actually remain agnostic to the age of the earth based of the inherent ambiguity of the biblical witness. As a result, anything that science discovers cannot help establish an either/or (Young Earth/ Old Earth) since the scriptural foundation itself is nebulous to the issue. If anyone is interested on this let me know and I will make sure you get a copy of the paper.

1 Like

I’m curious as this this thought and it’s source? the chronological time line of this statement (to me) seems to be

  • evil exists in the human heart prior to the creation of the world (even though humans do not yet exist)
  • God needed to create the world in order to eradicate that not yet existing evil

I would suggest a more biblical chronological timeline would be

  • God created a perfect world, with Adam and Eve as it’s first literal people
  • They fell, and at that point evil entered the world: both in suffering (passive) and evil (active).
  • God foreknew that this would happen, and it was Christ’s death on the cross that eradicates evil in the human heart.

Of course, you have to ask where this evil originated as we know that Satan tempted Eve. Satan, an angel, rebelled and said ‘I will be like the most High’ and was cast out of heaven.

The creation of the world was not ‘necessary’ to eradicate not yet existing evil in not yet existing human hearts.

Also, I might add a small question regarding God killing an innocent animal and using skins to cover Adam and Eve. If there were millions of years of death before the fall; why was the killing of an innocent animal meaningful at that point? This first ‘atonement’; a covering of sin, along with all the Old Testament sacrificial system; pointed towards the eventual death of Jesus on the cross which is a permanent atonement for all sins.

just my thoughts.

1 Like

Hey Jennifer, not all pain is the result of sin. For example, muscular pain cannot be the result of a fallen world. Moreover, a degree of pain of childbearing was inherent in creation if you examine the hebrew text in Gen.3:16- it lends itself to an increase in duration, assuming a prior duration. I wrote a paper on the fine tuning of pain and pleasure in God’s created order a couple years ago if you are interested in more about the relationship of pain and pleasure inherent in creation as a backdrop on the topic of evil. It was an apologetic against atheism on the foundation of pain and evil disproving God. If you’re interested I would be more than happy to share.

1 Like

Thanks, Clint! I’d love to read your paper.