A novel view on Old Earth Creationism

You're mixing 'Truth' with science and knowledge. The Bible is not a 'science book'. If it touches on the creation at times, which it does, what it says is true. When it involves at times history, which it does, what it says is true. But it is not a history book. The Bible is a book concerning Redemption. It is revealed Truth from God. Man's efforts to understand the creation is science. Thus it is always making errors, changing it's mind, etc. etc. Man's efforts to understand the Word of God involves God revealing it again also. There is no need to call the study of God's word a science.

Evolution is evolution. God did not create through evolution.

Why let the philosophy of science define God's creation?

Quantrill

 

And my point is that the Bible said Adam begat a son. (Gen. 5:3). It doesn't say Cain evolved from Adam.

Quantrill

 

Deep time is false and has no scientific basis (don’t tell anyone).

 

While I do hold an old universe view, Genesis 1:1-2, I also hold the 6 days Genesis 1:3-31, to be actual 6 earth days. Exodus 20:11. So effectively I fall in neither YEC and OEC camps. So I differ on some points of both views.

 

Astornomically, the evidence is an old universe. Andromeda Galaxy has been measured to be 2.5 million light years away. What we see may no longer exist. That would go for the more distant galaxies as well. The measured 13.7 billion years for the known universe could even be too young. Psalms 102:26, Revelation 20:11, Revelation 21:1, Isaiah 65:17.

 

Well then if that is how you see it, you are to me irrational. There is no reasoning with you that I can see.

 

God created life directly, as in Genesis 1 and Geness 2. Micro evolution was one result which you deny.

 

The only problem area that confounds both sides as all other areas favor young earth.

 

What do you know about zircon crystals age and age of the earth?

 

Large Gem Crystals Grew within Hours: Consistent with Rapid Granite Formation on a Young Earth

 

The light-time travel problem by Dr. Danny Faulkner.

 

So do those young gem crystal date to be billions of years?

 

Helium Diffusion in Zircon: Flaws in a Young-Earth Argument

Read

Read

 

If one understands the 4. Billion years for earth's crust in or before Genesis 1:2. Genesis 1:3-31 can still be plausible to be a mere 6000 years. But I think much older do to global flood evidence. Do to the same type of plant and animal fossil layers on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

 

The dating methods are based upon uniformitarianism as you know. Do you believe that there was a worldwide catastrophic flood 4300 years ago?

 

Hugh Ross tries to combine creationism with deep time. I reject deep time as part of evolution and I rely on Biblical creationist scientists to be correct in scientific and mathematical issues beyond my education.

 

I hold also to the same. I hold to the Gap Theory. I believe it is Scriptural.

Quantrill

 

Yes, I do deny. Evolution has no part in God's creative process. Not Macro. Not Micro.

In other words I could say Macro-bs. Or, I could say Micro-bs. Both are still bs.

Quantrill

 

Why let the philosophy of science define God's creation?

You say I am irrational. Yet you use philosophy to understand God and His creation.

Quantrill

 

Not if the evidence does not support it. Honestly I do not believe a mere 4300 years is supported by the known physical global flood evidence. Biblical OEC believe in the universal flood not a global flood.