How do you young earthers know

[Dr. Walter]

13.86 billion plus 1.

more like minus 13.86 billion plus 6 to 10 thousand years.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Now you are calling God a liar. You have called Christ a liar and now you accuse him of lying again.

I'm not calling God a liar. I'm simply stating quite clearly that your literal interpretation of Genesis doesn't hold up to scruntiny.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

When Adam died spiritual he was "dead" in the same literal sense that Paul speaks of in Ephesians 2:1. Spiritual death is not a figure of speech nor is it a non-literal statement! You have a literal "spirit" and a literal "body" and both are subject to literal death. The Genesis passage is stated in such a way to include literal death in its most comprehensive application - dying thou shalt surely die. Spiritual death produces all temporal results (sickness, disease) as well as culimating in physical and eternal death of both spirit and body.

It is you that is perverting the LITERAL meaning of death by restricting it to only a physical aspect when LITERALLY it is comprehensive of much more.

Genesis doesn't LITERALLY say any of that! That's the problem with your LITERAL interpretation of it.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

You are not interested in serious debate because you ignored my answer to this objection. The answer was given right in the same post.

Every single day of the seven literal days was the "beginning" of something new and thus the "beginning of creation" includes all seven days. This does not violate the use of such language when every day is tied together with the following days in the final words of Genesis 1:31-2:1-3.

However, Christ's words are impossible to fit with a FIGURATIVE or SYMBOLIC days consisting of millions or billions of years.

Well, if that's the case then fossils must have been created in the last 6 - 10,000 years. Where are all of those human fossils? Hmmm...

BTW I did not call you an evolutionist! I was describing a Theistic Evolutionists or one who inteprets the days of Genesis one as symbolic of thousands, millions or billions of years to harmonize with the old age theory and evolutionary developments claimed by them.

An old Earth theory doesn't necessarily rely on evolution.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

I'm not calling God a liar. I'm simply stating quite clearly that your literal interpretation of Genesis doesn't hold up to scruntiny.

WM

The only thing you have proved is that one must put away common sense to argue down your line of logic. You will not deal with Ephesians 2:1-3 or admit that LITERAL death involves more than a LITERAL physical death. If you did admit this OBVIOUS truth then you could not make the silly argument that Adam did not literally die in some sense as God said. The Hebrew text LITERALLY says "dying thou shalt surely die" but YOUR INTERPRETATION is false and misleading.

Your responses are simply ludricrous and irrational. There is not a serious answer in any of your responses.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Well, if that's the case then fossils must have been created in the last 6 - 10,000 years. Where are all of those human fossils? Hmmm...

Your are still pitting a matter of HUMAN SPECULATION against the explicit and clear words of Christ and other men writing under inspiration.

[An old Earth theory doesn't necessarily rely on evolution.

WM

There would be no old earth theory if the evolutionary interpretation was non-existent.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Well, if that's the case then fossils must have been created in the last 6 - 10,000 years. Where are all of those human fossils? Hmmm...

Your are still pitting a matter of HUMAN SPECULATION against the explicit and clear words of Christ and other men writing under inspiration.

Please answer my question.

There would be no old earth theory if the evolutionary interpretation was non-existent.

What? Look at the ECF quotes that I provided. Evolution is never mentioned.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Genesis doesn't LITERALLY say any of that! That's the problem with your LITERAL interpretation of it.

WM

Genesis does not say literally "dying thou shalt surely die"??????

Do you think Paul is speaking symbolically in Ephesians 2:1-3??? Were they symbolically "dead"?? Where do you think the deadness that Paul spoke of in Ephesians 2:1 originated ??? Did it originate with the Ephesians only? Have you ever read Romans 5:12-19 where death originated?

Does Paul teach that death originated with Adam's physical death or with "by one mans disobedience"??? When did that one act of disobedience take place? When he physically died?

Rom. 5:17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one;

Did this offence occur on the day he ate or the day he physically died?

Isn't Paul comparing Adam with Christ in their representative capacities? When did Adam's representative capacity terminate? The day he ate or the day he physicall died?

Yes, I realize that you are not going to give any rational response to these questions. I realize your agenda is simply to win an argument regardless of what kind of nonsense you have to say. I hope you prove this conclusion wrong but I doubt it.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Please answer my question.

You have the gall to ask me to answer your question when you have skirted around every question I have asked you thus far??????

You have not given even ONE substantive serious response to the BIBLICAL evidences I have continually placed before you and you ask me to respond to a SPECULATIVE question as though the lack of an answer to that SPECULATION would prove to be victorious for your theories??????

I will answer your question with another question- Have they dug up all the fossil records or is there more to be unearthed?

 

[WestminsterMan]

Genesis does not say literally "dying thou shalt surely die"??????

Do you think Paul is speaking symbolically in Ephesians 2:1-3??? Were they symbolically "dead"?? Where do you think the deadness that Paul spoke of in Ephesians 2:1 originated ??? Did it originate with the Ephesians only? Have you ever read Romans 5:12-19 where death originated?

Does Paul teach that death originated with Adam's physical death or with "by one mans disobedience"??? When did that one act of disobedience take place? When he physically died?

Rom. 5:17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one;

Did this offence occur on the day he ate or the day he physically died?

Isn't Paul comparing Adam with Christ in their representative capacities? When did Adam's representative capacity terminate? The day he ate or the day he physicall died?

Yes, I realize that you are not going to give any rational response to these questions. I realize your agenda is simply to win an argument regardless of what kind of nonsense you have to say. I hope you prove this conclusion wrong but I doubt it.

Well, if that's the case then fossils must have been created in the last 6 - 10,000 years. Where are all of those human fossils? Hmmm...

Please answer my question!!!

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

I'm not calling God a liar. I'm simply stating quite clearly that your literal interpretation of Genesis doesn't hold up to scruntiny.

WM

Your whole question about the issue of Adam dying on the day he ate rests completely upon your FALSE INTERPRETATION that Biblical "death" cannot be literal or real unless it is speaking about ONE ASPECT of death or the physical separation of the spirit of man from the material substance of man.

Ephesians 2:1-3 proves your interpretation is false and thus the whole foundation of your argument is false.

 

[WestminsterMan]

You have the gall to ask me to answer your question when you have skirted around every question I have asked you thus far??????

You have not given even ONE substantive serious response to the BIBLICAL evidences I have continually placed before you and you ask me to respond to a SPECULATIVE question as though the lack of an answer to that SPECULATION would prove to be victorious for your theories??????

I will answer your question with another question- Have they dug up all the fossil records or is there more to be unearthed?

That about what I expected....

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Please answer my question!!!

WM

I get it. You have the right not to answer any of my questions but I have no right to not answer just ONE of your questions.

Again, have they dug up all fossils in the earth? How do you know then such fossils are still not there? Since man is but one specie among hundreds of others you would not expect his fossils to be as plentiful.

Have they dug up EVERY known specie living at the time of the fossil records?????

You are simply at a dead end and so you run to vain speculative arguments but can't respond to Biblical evidences repeatedly placed in front of your face that you can examine.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Your whole question about the issue of Adam dying on the day he ate rests completely upon your FALSE INTERPRETATION that Biblical "death" cannot be literal or real unless it is speaking about ONE ASPECT of death or the physical separation of the spirit of man from the material substance of man.

Ephesians 2:1-3 proves your interpretation is false and thus the whole foundation of your argument is false.

Hardly. The discussion was whether Genesis was chronoloically acurate. I've shown that it's not. You can quote Ephesians all you want but it changes nothing.

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

That about what I expected....

WM

Are you asking me to beleive your speculative theory simply because the earth has not been completely examined for all the fossils it may or may not contain as though silence proves or disproves anything???? Is "silence" the best argument you have against an abundance of clear and explicit Biblical evidence to the contrary - evidence you have yet to even give a reasonable and rational response?????

If I advance my position on this kind of speculative silence, I would be laughed off the forum.

 

[WestminsterMan]

I get it. You have the right not to answer any of my questions but I have no right to not answer just ONE of your questions.

Again, have they dug up all fossils in the earth? How do you know then such fossils are still not there? Since man is but one specie among hundreds of others you would not expect his fossils to be as plentiful.

Have they dug up EVERY known specie living at the time of the fossil records?????

You are simply at a dead end and so you run to vain speculative arguments but can't respond to Biblical evidences repeatedly placed in front of your face that you can examine.

That's an argument from silence there doc. It just doesn't work in a logical debate. Whether or not all fossils have been excavated is meaningless. Clearly they haven't. Yet scientific excavation has been underway for hundreds of years and not ONE human fossil has ever been found. They've found human remains going back to Old Testament times and - guess what - no fossilized human remains. I think it is abundantly clear who is at a dead end.

Now I've answered your question so answer mine. In order for one to hold to a strict and literal interpretation of Genesis one must also hold that the Earth is between 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Thus it follows that fossils are about the same age. If that is true (that fossils can form during a 6,000 -10,000 year period) then where are all of the fossilized human remains? They should be everywhere, yet the aren't.

Whoop-de-dadgum-de-do!

WM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Hardly. The discussion was whether Genesis was chronoloically acurate. I've shown that it's not. WM

Are you on any current medications? Have you forgotten that it is the issue of the fall that was one of your major proofs why you believe the chronologly is not accurate???? If the major proof is no proof at all then how can you rationally respond that this discussion was not grounded upon that particular item - as if the evidence you put forth concerning your idea of chronological inaccuracy? If you have no real proof then how can you advance your argument???

You can quote Ephesians all you want but it changes nothing.

The truth is that no matter how much Biblical quotations and evidence denies your humanistic speculations it "changes nothing" in your mind and it won't until God.....

 

[mandym]

That's an argument from silence there doc. It just doesn't work in a logical debate. Whether or not all fossils have been excavated is meaningless. Clearly they haven't. Yet scientific excavation has been underway for hundreds of years and not ONE human fossil has ever been found. They've found human remains going back to Old Testament times and - guess what - no fossilized human remains. I think it is abundantly clear who is at a dead end.

Now I've answered your question so answer mine. In order for one to hold to a strict and literal interpretation of Genesis one must also hold that the Earth is between 6,000 - 10,000 years old. Thus it follows that fossils are about the same age. If that is true (that fossils can form during a 6,000 -10,000 year period) then where are all of the fossilized human remains? They should be everywhere, yet the aren't.

Whoop-de-dadgum-de-do!

WM

Why should they be everywhere?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

It is pretty telling that facts just don't line up with a literal genesis account.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Now I've answered your question so answer mine. WM

Why Don't We Find More Human Fossils?
by John D. Morris, Ph.D.

The fossil record abounds with the remains of past life. If the creationist interpretation of the fossil record is basically correct, most of the fossils were deposited during the Flood of Noah's day, as "the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished" (II Peter 3:6). These organisms were trapped and buried in ocean-bottom mud, which later hardened into sedimentary rock, fossilizing the organic remains.

But where are the pre-flood human remains? According to Scripture, the patriarchs lived long ages, and had large families and many years of childbearing potential. Where are their fossils?

First, we must rightly consider the nature of the fossil record. Over ninety-five percent of all fossils are marine creatures, such as clams, corals, and trilobites—mostly invertebrates with a hard outer surface. Of the remaining five percent, most are plants. Much less than one percent of all fossils are land animals. This encompasses reptiles (including dinosaurs)— amphibians, mammals, birds, and humans.

Land creatures have what we call a "low-fossilization potential." As land animals die in water, they bloat, float, and come apart. It is very difficult to trap a bloated animal under water, in order for it to be buried. Furthermore, scavengers readily devour both flesh and bone. Seawater and bacterial action destroy everything. The scouring ability of underwater mudflows, common during the Flood, would grind bone to powder.

Conversely, what land fossils are found were mostly laid down during the Ice Age— a land-oriented event following the Flood, which had the ability to bury animals in land-derived deposits. (And, by the way, there are human fossils in those sediments.)

But the purpose of Noah's Flood was to destroy the land communities—not preserve them—especially humans. Some creationists even postulate the pre-Flood continents were subducted down into the mantle, totally annihilating all remnants of the civilizations. In any scenario, what land fossils were preserved would be buried late in the Flood, near the surface, and would have been subject to erosion and destruction once again as the Floodwaters rushed off the rising continents.

Furthermore, we mustn’t over-estimate the pre-Flood population, by considering the patriarchal lives and families as typical, for "the earth (was) filled with violence" (Genesis 6:13). Bloodshed would no doubt have terminated many family lines in both humans and animals.

For purposes of discussion, let us assume 300,000,000 people died in the Flood, and that each one was preserved as a fossil evenly distributed in the sedimentary record, which consists of about 300,000,000 cubic miles. The chances of such a fossil intersecting the earth's surface, being found by someone, and then being properly and honestly identified is vanishingly small.

On the other hand, if evolution is true, and humans have lived on Earth for three million years, many trillions have lived and died. Where are their fossils? This is the more vexing question.