How old is the earth?

[just-want-peace]

Evolution is so solidified in our culture that little things like the change of the speed of light will be ignored and/or jeered since that would eliminate the billios of years required for the evo process.:BangHead:

My thoughts as to the evo's reaction to such a discovery; tho' probably very deeply unconscious ---

"If evo is not true, then there must be 'some' intelligence behind all this stuff, and that means that I ain't the king of the universe. No way I'm giving up my independence to some unseen god, so I'm just gonna ignore it! Can't be true anyway!!!"

 

[quantumfaith]

Evolution is so solidified in our culture that little things like the change of the speed of light will be ignored and/or jeered since that would eliminate the billios of years required for the evo process.:BangHead:

My thoughts as to the evo's reaction to such a discovery; tho' probably very deeply unconscious ---

"If evo is not true, then there must be 'some' intelligence behind all this stuff, and that means that I ain't the king of the universe. No way I'm giving up my independence to some unseen god, so I'm just gonna ignore it! Can't be true anyway!!!"

Just in case you might not be aware, there are multitudes of believers who are "theistic evolutionists" who fall in the Intelligence Design community. Not everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model, is Darwinian or Naturalistic.

 

[nodak]

Also not all who are old earth accept evolution, or are old earth in order to somehow accomodate science. Many are oe on Biblical evidence as they see it.

And many believe that such things as the change in the speed of light, Einstein's theory of relativity, etc, negate belief in a literal 24 hour day during creation.

Creation exactly as written in Genesis? Yes, but no more than the Bible says.

 

[BobinKy]

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881 -1955).

Defining The Christian Mystic

The Release of the Spirit by Watchman Nee

 

[TCGreek]

The age of the earth is not the preoccupation of Scripture. It's a modern science preoccupation.

 

[glfredrick]

Just in case you might not be aware, there are multitudes of believers who are "theistic evolutionists" who fall in the Intelligence Design community. Not everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model, is Darwinian or Naturalistic.

I believe you mis-spoke. You can say that "not everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model is a Naturalist," but you cannot say that everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model is not Darwinian (or pick a name that represents the latest current fad).

One cannot find a concept like "evolution" via the Scriptures, which then, by necessity, means that there is some "ism" being imported into one's worldview.

Intelligent Design is not "evolutionary" per se. At least not macro-evolution as is mostly held by those claiming the term "evolution." It is, rather, a view that suggests that the Creator caused His divine will to be accomplished in such a way that allows for certain micro-evolutionary potentials to exist within the bounds of His design specifications. I.e, the variety of dog, cat, flower, etc., all of which are still (and always) "dog," "cat," and "flower."

Oh, and FWIW, the Darwinian evolutionary model has been tried, found wanting, and rejected save for the worldview it carries forward as Dennett describes, "the universal acid."

 

[quantumfaith]

I believe you mis-spoke. You can say that "not everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model is a Naturalist," but you cannot say that everyone who feels that evolution is a viable model is not Darwinian (or pick a name that represents the latest current fad).

One cannot find a concept like "evolution" via the Scriptures, which then, by necessity, means that there is some "ism" being imported into one's worldview.

Intelligent Design is not "evolutionary" per se. At least not macro-evolution as is mostly held by those claiming the term "evolution." It is, rather, a view that suggests that the Creator caused His divine will to be accomplished in such a way that allows for certain micro-evolutionary potentials to exist within the bounds of His design specifications. I.e, the variety of dog, cat, flower, etc., all of which are still (and always) "dog," "cat," and "flower."

Oh, and FWIW, the Darwinian evolutionary model has been tried, found wanting, and rejected save for the worldview it carries forward as Dennett describes, "the universal acid."

GL,

I did not mispeak, but I do appreciate your attempt to imply that I did. There are NUMEROUS christian believers who feel that God used "evolution" to bring about life on this planet, and yes, most , if not all of them, would find themselves in the larger context as "Intelligent Design" proponents.

 

[quantumfaith]

The age of the earth is not the preoccupation of Scripture. It's a modern science preoccupation.

I don't believe that such should be a "pre-occupation, however, I find myself in strong agreement with apologist William Lane Craig, that those of us with a Christian world view should be encouraging and training great thinkers and minds in all disciplines of science and philosophy to address science and philosophy from the minds of pure naturalists. Thinkers who are confident in their faith and willing to examine evidence, thought and theories and confront those with clear, rational, logical and faithful thinking.

 

[freeatlast]

The statement "There are NUMEROUS Christian believers who feel that God used "evolution" to bring about life on this planet" is certainly true. There are those in Christian circles who hold to long periods of time. However also true is that they have to totally disregard the scripture to hold that view. No one ever read the Gen account and suddenly believed that there was long periods of time involved. They saw 6 literal days as the text gives and rejected it and then sought out to corrupt what is written so as to have some justification for their false beliefs. If men have not a love for the truth then God will make them believe the lie.

 

[Jedi Knight]

The age of the earth is not the preoccupation of Scripture. It's a modern science preoccupation.

Nice one TCGreek! :thumbsup:

 

[saturneptune]

One cannot find a concept like "evolution" via the Scriptures, which then, by necessity, means that there is some "ism" being imported into one's worldview.

What do you mean? Lot's wife evolved into a pillar of salt.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Okay. Not much light but lots of heat.

10-page limit and thread closed.