Young Earth Creationism (YEC)

Yes I’d be interested to read it too - not in order to prove it right or wrong but in the interests of meaningful discussion if you are willing to share. :slight_smile:

The problem of evil is one of the most complex ones to think through. I’ve read Tim Keller’s ‘walking with God through pain and suffering’ and it’s interesting how the secular worldview is least equipped to answer that question. It’s a while ago now so can’t remember all that much of it.

To complain about evil, you must suggest there is such a thing as good. Objective ‘good’ is basically impossible to prove without saying there is a God.

2 Likes

By the way, any relation to Lee Strobel who wrote ‘Case for Christ?’ Just a long shot but a fairly uncommon last name. :slight_smile::slight_smile:

1 Like

Hi Clint , I’ve been a Christian for over 45 years and held a yec view also so I understand where your coming from . However i recently learnt about the scientific evidence for the God of the bible and how scripture does concur with this . while you may view it all as ambiguous I disagree. But that’s not the point. The point is the evidence the God of the bible is insurmountable when you view the scientific evidence. For example Many religious texts refer to a God or Gods creating within space and time which eternally exists. The bible speaks of God creating and existing before time was ever created. The Big Bang as it is known points to a beginning of space time matter and energy.
Well here are some of these references in the bible re a God Beyond time who created it.
Genesis 1 . In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Hebrews 11.3 The universe that we can detect did not come from that which we could detect .

John 1.3 Through him all things were made, without him nothing was made that has been made.

Col,1:15-17 For in him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth , things visible and invisible, all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things and in him all things hold together.

Gen 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,

Isiah 42.5 This is what God says, the God who created the heavens and stretched them out. Who spread out the earth and it’s produce.

John 17.12 You loved me before the creation of the world .

2nd Timothy 1.9 the grace of God we now experience was put into effect before the beginning of time.

Titus 1.2 in the hope of eternal life which God promises before the beginning of time.

Conversely the non biblical religious texts of the world teach that God or Gods or cosmic forces create within space and time that eternally exists.

The bible stands alone in saying God created Space and time, that he creates independent of space and time and that Space and time don’t exist until God creates it.

This distinguishes the God of the bible from the Gods of the non biblical faiths in the sense that they say space and time are eternal .

The bible says space and time are temporal. They are as different as chalk and cheese. Now why is this so exiting well over the last 40 years or so the scientists have made some discoveries about the universe and these were written up into what is called , space time theorems Here are two

“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)

“Any universe that expands on average , has a beginning implying a causal agent outside space and time that creates space time matter and energy.” (Borde, Velenkin, Guth,)

Borde and Velekin commit themselves to trying to come up with a different set of conclusions but found themselves confronted by more evidence that dug them deeper and deeper into a cosmic dark hole.

Desperate to find an alternative to a space time beginning they spend ten years crunching the numbers and conclude that ‘regardless of the energy conditions or what type of inflation event the universe experienced it must have a beginning.’

Vilenkin wrote in a subsequent book . “With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind a past eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning. “

This problem is in reference to two issues.

Namely that a beginning implies a beginner and that the evolutionary models foundations were now being exposed to humongous cracks (as it is based on an eternal universe, allowing the dice of chance infinite possibilities. )

As sir Arthur Eddington puts it. “We (must) allow evolution an infinite time to get started.”

There is no greater miracle then the beginning of space and time and Here are some scientists response to this evidence
Steven hawking also said 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.”

physicist Sir Fred Hoyle
“I do not believe that any scientist who examines the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed.”
Astrophysicist Paul Davies in his book the cosmic blueprint concludes that we have powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all and the impression of design is overwhelming .
Steven hawking said
“If the expansion rate in the universe was different by one part in a 1000 million million a second after the Big Bang the universe would collapse back on it self no galaxies no universe .”

Smoot astronomer and project leader of the COBE satellite declared.” What we have found is evidence for the birth of the universe … It’s like looking at God.”

According to science historian Fred Burnham, the community of scientists was prepared to consider the idea that God created the universe “a more respectable hypothesis today than at any other time in the last 100 years. Prof Burbridge of University of California complained his fellow astronomers were rushing off to join “the first church of Christ of the Big Bang.” Ted Koppel on ABC’s Nightline began by quoting the first two verses of Genesis to which the physicist immediately added the third.

Believe me it just gets better. With more evidence in cosmology of the supernatural handiwork of ourhevesnly father . Our God is great and awesome . He’s turning the science community on its head. It makes witnessing and presenting to the lost the gospel really exciting. All the above info can be found in Dr High Ross’s book ‘ The Creator and the Cosmos’ He also appeared with Ravi defending Christianity on a radio show I’ll try and link
Cheers Bronie

1 Like

Here’s the radio segment mentioned with

Ravi Zacharias and Hugh Ross - Radio Debate/Discussion with non-believers (Rare)

Just to be clear, I am not contending that God did not create. I am simply saying the text is not clear about the age of the earth, and since it is not clear, the scientific evidence is unable to be used to affirm “that” scripture says X or Y.

Hahaha none at all that I know of :smiley:

1 Like

Yes I agree no where in scripture does it put an age on the earth however the antiquity of the earth is implied . Given that the Bible is divinely inspired it seems plausible that it’s ordinary words communicate extraordinary truths so rich in meaning that their message unfolds from one generation to the next. One brief passage may reveal truth in layers, with different levels of meaning and yet never self contradictory as history unfolds and knowledge advances. Once upon a time the church believed the sun revolved around the earth and they used scripture to back it up. This debate between old earth and young earth hasn’t always been as strong. It’s only since the evolutionary model appeared last century that Christians felt there was a link between an old universe and evolution. Hence their turn away from it. But in the sixteenth century a Protestant doctrinal standard was written and in it in article 2 it states that the words of the bible and the record of nature provide trustworthy and reliable revelation from God , giving testimony to Gods attributes and handiwork . During the reformation this approach to science was predominant in Protestant theology. Psalm 19 says that “ the heavens declare the glory of God the skies proclaim the work of his handiwork day after day they pour forth speech night after night that display knowledge . There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard . Their voice goes out to all the earth their words to the end of the world.” Powerful stuff when you put it alongside the evidence of the hundreds of fine tuning features of the universe that make life possible here on earth.

Jewish physicist and author Gerald Lawrence Schroeder pursued his studies of cosmology which gave him the view that scripture and the record of nature concur with modern scientific discoveries that present an old earth foundation.

Or JP Moreland philosopher, theologian and apologist. In the book ‘Three Views on Creation and Evolution.’said, “To believe that the Bible allows for millions of years is not something forced on the text from the outside. One can make a strong case for biblical ambiguity regarding the age of the Earth without any references to geology or astronomy.”

Look you can argue a case for a young earth if you want but scripture can and is interpreted from an old earth perspective .

When presented with the evidence from scripture and science, people turn to Christ.
Chemistry Professor and Nobel Laureate Dr Rick Smalley was credited as the father of nanotechnology by the US senate after his death in 2005 . Smalley was indeed presented with this evidence and converted to Christianity in his final years.

At the [Tuskegee _University)'s 79th Annual scholarship Dinner while urging his audience to take seriously their role as the higher species on this planet. He said

“Genesis’ was right, and there was a creation, and that Creator is still involved … We are the only species that can destroy the Earth or take care of it and nurture all that live on this very special planet. I’m urging you to look on these things. For whatever reason, this planet was built specifically for us. Working on this planet is an absolute moral code. … Let’s go out and do what we were put on Earth to do."

During the final year of his life, Smalley spoke in a letter at the Alumini Award ceremony.

"Although I suspect I will never fully understand, I now think the answer is very simple: it’s true. God did create the universe about 13.7 billion years ago, and of necessity has involved Himself with His creation ever since. The purpose of this universe is something that only God knows for sure, but it is increasingly clear to modern science that the universe was exquisitely fine-tuned to enable human life. We are somehow critically involved in His purpose. Our job is to sense that purpose as best we can, love one another, and help Him get that job done.”

Smalley has earlier presented the scientific evidence in cosmology for the God of the bible to an audience of thousands at the same secular university and got a standing ovation. :blush:Makes you think doesn’t it.

So keep in mind during this debate it’s really about reaching others for Christ and if scripture supports the recent scientific discoveries we should embrace it for the benefit of the gospel. Cheers Bronie

To reiterate, in case I have failed to be clear, I agree with a vast majority of what you are saying. I am not challenging scientific evidence for the existence of God nor for His creation. I am merely pointing out that the assumptions of old/young earth that are being made from the biblical text, in light of science, are unable to support the claim of any reference to the age of the earth. So, when those assumptions are being impugned one cannot then use those assumptions to support them in the conversation since they ostensibly “beg the question” ( type of circular argument) with someone who rejects those assumptions (scripture supports modern science on the age of the earth); that is until the tertiary issues have been resolved in order to revisit them again, if possible.

My position is to not argue for either young or old earth, but to remain agnostic to the age of the earth regarding the scriptural witness. Science can say X or Y, but since the Bible is not clear on the issue, and does not need to be clear in order to be divinely inspired or inerrant, it is enough to maintain a skeptical (positive sense) position and let science decide for itself without using scripture, since scripture is not explicit or even implicit to the age of the earth. The contention of the age of the earth should not be an essential apologetic when talking with non-believers since the length of time bears little relevance to the “fact” of creation by God, a much more important apologetic endeavor.

In sum, I am not arguing against apologetics for creation or science. I am simply arguing against the dogmatism of either side as to the age of the earth, not creation itself or science that can support creation itself and the existence of God. If I have not made my intentions apparent, please, offer me some grace by reading my research paper when I finish it.

Blessings,
Clint

3 Likes

Hi Clint , yes dogmatism is not good , grace is better however before leaving this world Christ asked us to preach the gospel . Now I would argue that A. There is enough scripture to back up an old earth philosophy and B. By adopting a young philosophy you are restricting yourself. Someone with the wealth of biblical knowledge like yourself is presenting the gospel with one hand tied behind your back. I believe God has given us all this scientific evidence to back up what scripture teaches because we are in a society where people deny the existence of God. How can you get them to John 3.16 if you can’t get them past a yec view of Genesis . This is not about point scoring it’s about saving souls. Consider this ‘ There is not a known scientist or Person with this perspective who believes the world is 6000 years old. How do we reach them. “ without compromise we can “Be all things to all men so that you can save some.” When asked by Johns disciples who he was , Jesus responded “Tell John The blind see and the deaf hear. “ Jesus himself pointed to the evidence. Why can’t we? My God is bigger than any evidence. It’s his world , it’s his evidence not the scientists. And yes I would like to read your thesis etc when your finished. But to reiterate. I find it frustrating that articulate bible believing Christians won’t look at the bible and see that yes the earth could be old .lets use this to win souls. Cheers Bron

1 Like

To be clear, I am not adopting either an old earth or a young earth view. I am adopting the third option which is that the text itself does not affirm one or the other; therefore, I don’t have to choose between a young earth or an old earth view.

Hi Matthew sorry about the delay in response. I’ll respond to the first question and other later. Before I do I have been doing some courses by Dr Hugh Ross ( old earth creationist) online and reading his books . He is the author of 18 books You will find all this articulated in his book “ why the universe is the way it is ‘ and ‘ Navigating Genesis ‘ and ‘ A Matter If Days’ and The Creator and the Cosmos ‘. But guess what I often ask him questions on Facebook or messenger and twitter to which he will personally respond . Questions are good . It great to ask questions. We should always question. Anyway , So if you need an answer to these questions from a more articulate source ask him yourself. Hey I’m learning too.
So your reference to evil I asked Dr Ross this morning and he responded with
“Evil did not exist in any human’s heart until Satan entered Eden and deceived Eve. Adam and Eve were not the first sinners. Satan was the first sinner. The Bible is silent on when Satan first sinned. Job 38 states that angels were present when God laid the foundations of the earth. How much before that event did God create angels we do not know. We do know based on several Scriptures that God began his works of redemption before He created the spacetime dimensions of the universe. These biblical statements imply that God created with the future entry of evil in mind and hence designed His creation in advance to be one of His tools for the future eradication of evil. For much more, see Why the Universe Is the Way It Is.”
I have to go but will look at the question again later to make sure we have addressed it. God bless :face_with_monocle:Bronie

1 Like

Sorry for the long delay in response … my time has collapsed on me; I have virtually no time to think, let alone reply. That and I absolutely 10000% (extra zeroes intentional) hate debating.

For Psalm 95, I understand you are trying to make ‘rest’ equal to the rest happening on the 7th day. I just don’t see these two as being equal to each other… I see allusions of likeness (the feelings of rest), but not their equivalence. So I do not see this suggesting anything about the length of time of creation.

With that aside, let’s get into Genesis 2. As I read Genesis 2, I see a definite break starting in 2:4. Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 2:3 forms one cohesive topic: what generally happened during each day of creation. Genesis 2:4 then goes back to parts of creation and goes into more details of said creation.

So God made Adam and placed him in the garden to work the garden (agreed).

(Genesis 2:15-22) Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

Question: What exactly did Adam need to do that day (not after that day … but that particular day)?

You claim he would have spent time to observe each of the animals (which to an extent I agree). How many animals are we talking about (how many animals would be considered ‘beast of the field’? How much time does it take to name something? I mean, I was able to name my dog within say a minute. Maybe he just named them with first impressions – which I would feel is pretty quick. Would he feel the need to spend much time at all? Was there any pressure on getting the ‘right’ name or any qualifications for the names he would give?

You say that the term ‘At long last’ (I don’t see any difference in meaning between ‘At last’ or ‘At long last’) implies that he waited at least a day or two. Why? I see ‘At long last’ and I find it like ‘Finally’ (would you agree?) I see this phrase as a mention of a conclusion of a long process; not necessarily days … but maybe many hours). If you are working on something for a many hours, but thinking it would not take that long, wouldn’t you have a similar phrase in mind? Why does ‘At long last’ have to be days?

“I find it frustrating that articulate bible believing Christians won’t look at the bible and see that yes the earth could be old .lets use this to win souls.”

You have given argument that young earth is a stumbling block for many scientists. I would tell you that if old earth was to be the correct interpretation, it would be a great stumbling block for me; I would find it hard to trust what I am reading is what is being said … and if I cannot trust what I am reading, what is the point of reading God’s Word; I will simply never truly know what I should believe.

But then, there are things that Jesus said that were stumbling blocks to others. “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26) “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:54) For it to simply be a stumbling block for others, does not dictate what is and is not true. Sure, we need to speak with love; but with love there must be truth. I cannot help those scientists on the stumbling block of young earth anymore than you can help me with the stumbling block of old earth.

But to be honest, I find it equally frustrating when the other articulate bible believing Christians dismiss the idea that the Earth could being young altogether … because the “science” of today says so and so the Bible needs to ‘fit’ that mold.

If God speaks truth and the Bible is His word, then:
(Exodus 20:8-11)Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy: You are to labor six days and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. You must not do any work - you, your son or daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the foreigner who is within your gates. For the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and everything in them in six days; then He rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and declared it holy.
(Exodus 31:12-17)The LORD said to Moses: “Tell the Israelites: You must observe My Sabbaths, for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, so that you will know that I am •Yahweh who sets you apart. Observe the Sabbath, for it is holy to you. Whoever profanes it must be put to death. If anyone does work on it, that person must be cut off from his people. Work may be done for six days, but on the seventh day there must be a Sabbath of complete rest, dedicated to the LORD. Anyone who does work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. The Israelites must observe the Sabbath, celebrating it throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign forever between Me and the Israelites, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, but on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.”

Is ‘day’ switching meanings here? If so, how does that make any sense to Moses … or the Israelites?

I feel like I am coming on stronger than I mean to be (and If I am, I am sorry). Really I am not saying that the Bible CAN’T be saying that the Earth is old … I am just saying, I see more compelling argument of a young Earth than an old Earth. And I really don’t like feeling like I have to defend my faith in God or the Bible and have any intelligence because I don’t see an old Earth in said Bible … and like I said, I absolutely abhor debating.

Hi Jonathon thanks for taking the time to respond. Before you did however I had decided to withdraw from this conversation as I thought I had articulated my points and different people could contribute now. However since you have personally asked me I’ll make a couple of points. I apologise if I came across to strongly. This is one of the reasons I have decided to withdraw from the general discussion. These types of discussions are centuries old and different prominent Christians have both held to different biblical interpretations from both sides. which is one of the reasons I love Christianity unlike other world religions who have to ‘tow the line’ so to speak . For example in my class at the school I work at, a Muslim woman is being excluded by others in her community because she refuses to wear a berker. We are talking modern Australia here. So that is sad for her.
So if the young earth biblical view satisfies your biblical curiosity enough that’s great ! For me it didn’t, it left too many questions unanswered. So after 40 plus years of holding to that view I’ve found a biblical interpretation that answers more questions and I’m excited about my faith more which can only be good. So God bless you , thanks for the chat . To answer the questions you posed above see https://www.reasons.org/explore
Bronie