Should every Christian be a young Earth creationist?

[SavedByGrace]

Look, I've been a Baptist for decades.
I understand that Old Earth Creationists are a rarity among conservative Baptists.
Every church I've ever joined (#2) has positioned itself in the YE Creationist position.
That being said, the OE Creationist position is defensible and doesn't compromise any necessary doctrinal position.

Many OE Creationists have developed the ability to quietly tolerate the constant badgering of YE Creationists (sometimes I can too).
I understand that from a babe you have been taught that Noah rode a baby brontosaurus into the ark.
It's hard to change. It's hard to see things from another perspective. It can be threatening to one's faith.
But it's possible.
Keep an open mind and turn your eyes away from YE creationist web sites.

Rob

I don't know if I have asked you this before.

Do you believe there is a "gap" of years between Genesis 1:1, and 1:2?

and, do you believe that the DAYS of Creation in Genesis 1, are literal 24 hour Days, or periods of time?

 

[Deacon]

Sorry if this is too long.

The Gap Theory is a theory developed when the science of geology began making advances that demonstrated the Earth was much older than previously imagined (early 1800’s). Although some still follow the theory its weakness is a poor understanding of Hebrew grammar. The late John Sailhamer developed a theory that I thought was related to the Gap Theory. It was interesting but I wasn’t impressed (Genesis Unbound).

Is there a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?
The question is more complicated than you might imagine. Today there are two primary positions, none really related to the Gap Theory. Many take the position that verse 1 is like a chapter title, the description follows.

When I first became a believer, rather early on, I was confronted by someone about this topic.
I took interest in it when in college (that’s when I began to read Bernard Ramm’s, “Christian
View of Science and Scripture”).
Ramm proposed a theory called Progressive Creationism. I was fascinated by the theory but not fully committed.

I continued to read about the topic and began to earnestly study the multitude of subjects related to it.
I worked at a Jewish hospital, which helped when I began to learn Hebrew.
I am a vivacious reader, particularly in theology and how it interacts with science. Many fine Christian philosophers interact with the subject.

More recently I read John H. Walton’s books (mentioned earlier).
I am as satisfied as I ever hoped to be after reading his work.
Walton was once Creation Science’s golden boy. A Hebrew scholar that fully supported a short - 7 day creation week.
They praised him for this - but there was a twist - he also believes the Earth is old.

So where does that leave me? I don’t think that we ever will know the full story until eternity comes and we will all wonder at the glory and grace God bestowed upon his children.
I’m satisfied in my own mind with what I know now and am willing to bend to new ideas as they are revealed.

Rob

 

[Van]

Every Christian should know they do not know exactly how God created the heavens and the earth. Like many others I have my opinion but other possible interpretations of scripture are possible, such as creation with apparent age, like the wine of Cana.

Thus the evidence for a less than 7000 year old earth is deeply flawed, and the evidence for the earth forming more than 4 billion years ago is deeply flawed. We should cool our jets and focus of serving Christ.

 

[Baptist Believer]

No.

 

[SavedByGrace]

No.

At least you should say why no?

 

[Deacon]

know

 

[SavedByGrace]

know

huh?

 

[JD731]

Sorry if this is too long.

The Gap Theory is a theory developed when the science of geology began making advances that demonstrated the Earth was much older than previously imagined (early 1800’s). Although some still follow the theory its weakness is a poor understanding of Hebrew grammar. The late John Sailhamer developed a theory that I thought was related to the Gap Theory. It was interesting but I wasn’t impressed (Genesis Unbound).

Is there a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?
The question is more complicated than you might imagine. Today there are two primary positions, none really related to the Gap Theory. Many take the position that verse 1 is like a chapter title, the description follows.

When I first became a believer, rather early on, I was confronted by someone about this topic.
I took interest in it when in college (that’s when I began to read Bernard Ramm’s, “Christian
View of Science and Scripture”).
Ramm proposed a theory called Progressive Creationism. I was fascinated by the theory but not fully committed.

I continued to read about the topic and began to earnestly study the multitude of subjects related to it.
I worked at a Jewish hospital, which helped when I began to learn Hebrew.
I am a vivacious reader, particularly in theology and how it interacts with science. Many fine Christian philosophers interact with the subject.

More recently I read John H. Walton’s books (mentioned earlier).
I am as satisfied as I ever hoped to be after reading his work.
Walton was once Creation Science’s golden boy. A Hebrew scholar that fully supported a short - 7 day creation week.
They praised him for this - but there was a twist - he also believes the Earth is old.

So where does that leave me? I don’t think that we ever will know the full story until eternity comes and we will all wonder at the glory and grace God bestowed upon his children.
I’m satisfied in my own mind with what I know now and am willing to bend to new ideas as they are revealed.

Rob

What would motivate God to lie about how long he took to create the physical universe? Is there a verse of scripture that modifies the information he gives in Genesis? Men have experienced 7 day weeks since they have occupied the earth. God said his days were measured by evenings and mornings. Jesus asked the question, "are there not 12 hours in the day?" This at least implies that there are 12 hours in the evening. If God would have said, hey guys, I created the whole shebang in 6 days and rested on the 7th, we might have room to speculate on how long a day is. But God went into detail of what he created in each day and counted them off. He stared and finished his creation in 6 days that were 24 hours in length.

The creation pictures a soul from conception to his eternity. The soul is conceived in the darkness and he is birthed into the light of the world. The end of a man is eternity in a never ending day or a never ending night and the deciding factor is his own choice.

Re 21:25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
Re 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
.

 

[Deacon]

What would motivate God to lie about how long he took to create the physical universe?

No, God doesn’t lie.
The meaning of the text lies with the intent of the Author.
Your question reveals an inability to interact with the text.
The proper interpretation of the creation passage in Genesis has been debated for ages.
Your hermeneutical approach appears to be driven by a hyper-literal interpretation. You’ve appear to have closed your eyes to the variety of ways God spoke to his people.
Open your eyes. It will reveal wonders beyond measure and enlarge your view of God’s majesty.

Rob

 

[37818]

I believe in a literal reading of the Genesis creation account. I am not a young universe creationist.

 

[Silverhair]

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

That is all I have to know.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I believe in a literal reading of the Genesis creation account. I am not a young universe creationist.

Then you are in contradiction

 

[SavedByGrace]

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

That is all I have to know.

So the rest of Genesis 1 and 2 and other Scripture passages don't matter?

 

[JD731]

No, God doesn’t lie.
The meaning of the text lies with the intent of the Author.
Your question reveals an inability to interact with the text.
The proper interpretation of the creation passage in Genesis has been debated for ages.
Your hermeneutical approach appears to be driven by a hyper-literal interpretation. You’ve appear to have closed your eyes to the variety of ways God spoke to his people.
Open your eyes. It will reveal wonders beyond measure and enlarge your view of God’s majesty.

Rob

Your approach has caused you to doubt and to be unsure. I remind you that the words of scripture are spiritual words and are easy to be understood in most cases but because of their simplicity are super hard for those who apply the wisdom of the world for their insight to believe. If God wanted to make creation simple to understand, how could he have made it more so?

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life

It is all about believing words..

 

[JD731]

I believe in a literal reading of the Genesis creation account. I am not a young universe creationist.

Then you are mistaken about believing a literal account.

 

[Deacon]

Your approach has caused you to doubt and to be unsure.

You’re confused aren’t you?
You really don’t get it.
What I doubt is your interpretation of Scripture… not Scripture itself.
You are trusting in your simple interpretation.
I’m looking deeper into God’s word and asking questions that you refuse to even consider.

Scripture is not always easy to understand.
From the earliest times there have been debates about its meaning.
The Apostle Peter even stated that sometimes it is downright hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16).

What is clear is God’s central message, the way to salvation through faith in Jesus.

These other things are interesting, they help us delve into the mysteries of God, but as you elude to, their worth is little compared to the wealth we have obtained by being children of God.

Rob.

 

[JD731]

You’re confused aren’t you?
You really don’t get it.
What I doubt is your interpretation of Scripture… not Scripture itself.
You are trusting in your simple interpretation.
I’m looking deeper into God’s word and asking questions that you refuse to even consider.

Scripture is not always easy to understand.
From the earliest times there have been debates about its meaning.
The Apostle Peter even stated that sometimes it is downright hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16).

What is clear is God’s central message, the way to salvation through faith in Jesus.

These other things are interesting, they help us delve into the mysteries of God, but as you elude to, their worth is little compared to the wealth we have obtained by being children of God.

Rob.

You are trying to interpret scripture as a mystery that is unexplained, at least in words that the simple among us can understand. Tell us again why the simple words God uses in Genesis cannot be believed.

 

[SavedByGrace]

You’re confused aren’t you?
You really don’t get it.
What I doubt is your interpretation of Scripture… not Scripture itself.
You are trusting in your simple interpretation.
I’m looking deeper into God’s word and asking questions that you refuse to even consider.

Scripture is not always easy to understand.
From the earliest times there have been debates about its meaning.
The Apostle Peter even stated that sometimes it is downright hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16).

What is clear is God’s central message, the way to salvation through faith in Jesus.

These other things are interesting, they help us delve into the mysteries of God, but as you elude to, their worth is little compared to the wealth we have obtained by being children of God.

Rob.

It is very clear that you are very much confused!

The literal days in Genesis 1 and no gap between verses 1 and 2, can never allow for an old earth. It is an impossibility.

Now prove otherwise

 

[Silverhair]

So the rest of Genesis 1 and 2 and other Scripture passages don't matter?

Why are you reading your views into my comment? We were speaking of creation were we not? Try to keep up with the conversation.

If your faith is dependent upon the time frame of creation you are trusting in the wrong thing. Creation does not save you. The God of creation does.

 

[Deacon]

You are trying to interpret scripture as a mystery that is unexplained, at least in words that the simple among us can understand. Tell us again why the simple words God uses in Genesis cannot be believed.

You are trying to interpret scripture as a mystery that is unexplained, at least in words that the simple among us can understand. Tell us again why the simple words God uses in Genesis cannot be believed.

Well I

You are trying to interpret scripture as a mystery that is unexplained, at least in words that the simple among us can understand. Tell us again why the simple words God uses in Genesis cannot be believed.

Well I can’t really do that, can I?
I’m simply saying their meaning is veiled in brevity and mystery.
God’s words were written to teach people of the faith to be encouraged and to gain wisdom in hope.
(Rom. 15:4; 2 Tim. 3:16-17).

It was not written to teach us cosmology.
Scripture was written to people of a different time, culture and understanding. The ancients couldn’t imagine the vastness of God’s creation. God gave us what was needed… a hope when there was no hope.

Rob