The impossibilities of YEC

[Meatros]

I've mentioned this in numerous threads now and I've been ignored, or I've been given severly inadequate answers. In any event, I decided to open a thread devoted to the subject of meteors, in an effort to stop cluttering other threads with it.

So how is YEC even a remote possibility in light of the massive meteors that have crashed into earth? I'm not debating the "age" of the meteor, not yet at least.

How is it possible, in a 6-10k time span that these meteors hit the earth and that mankind survived? There have been 5+ huge meteors that have struck the earth, in addition there have been over 140+ large meteors that have also hit the earth. The reason I bring up the 5 is that each of those five, by itself, is an extinction level meteor. Meaning that when it hit the earth, the entire earth was effected by it.

In otherwords it's simply not even remotely possible that the earth is around 10k years old. It has to be older, unless there is some explanation of how mankind was able to survive these meteor strikes. There certainly isn't any biblical support for the strikes. I'll admit there is some biblical support for possible meteor strikes, but there isn't any for meteors this massive.

So how do YEC explain them? For the most part, it seems that the YEC I've encountered have simply ignored them.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Here's a link to article on the moon, showing how heavily cratered the moon's surface is except where exceptionally large impacts caused enough lava flow to drown the craters. The earth and the moon are in the same interplanetary neighborhood and would have endured the same at the same time. In the classic science scenario, these impacts mostly occurred during in the final stages of the accretion of the bodies of the solar system, 4 billion years ago more or less, then afterwards life began to evolove. As you point out, there is no way for these kind of impact events to have occured within a span of only 6 to 8 thousand years and leave life on earth to survive.

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/moon2.html

Here's a link to the planet Mercury, which also experienced the same kind of impact events at the closing of the creation of the solar system.
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/mercury/Interior_Surface/Surface/mercter_Image.html

Every airless body in the solar system bears mute testimony to the violence experienced during the accretion process that led to the present solar system family.

[ June 16, 2003, 12:20 PM: Message edited by: Paul of Eugene ]

 

[aefting]

In otherwords it's simply not even remotely possible that the earth is around 10k years old. It has to be older, unless there is some explanation of how mankind was able to survive these meteor strikes.

And yet, here we are -- amazing!

I don't know how anyone can be so confident about the effects of these meteors. What is the largest meteor that we have observed hit the earth? How can we be sure about interpolating the data when we don't know the conditions of the earth, or a host of other things, at the time of the large meteor strikes?

Besides, you're not taking into account data that we CAN be sure about -- God's unequivocal testimoney in Ex. 20 that He created everything in 6 days. "Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule on the earth?" (Job 38:33 ESV) God can. He is the one who controls life and death and meteors and their effects. He holds everything together (Col. 1:17).

Certainly you're not arguing that God could not have created the universe in 6 days as He said and superintend the fall of meteors, even large ones, so that they would acomplish their purpose and no more?

Andy

 

[Meatros]

Actually there are still videotapes of the last huge meteor striking a planet-Jupiter. IIRC the shoemaker-levy meteor.

Besides, you're not taking into account data that we CAN be sure about -- God's unequivocal testimoney in Ex. 20 that He created everything in 6 days. "Do you know the ordinances of the heavens? Can you establish their rule on the earth?" (Job 38:33 ESV) God can. He is the one who controls life and death and meteors and their effects. He holds everything together (Col. 1:17).

So God let the meteors hit earth, covered them up, made no biblical mention of it....for what purpose? Why?

Certainly you're not arguing that God could not have created the universe in 6 days as He said and superintend the fall of meteors, even large ones, so that they would acomplish their purpose and no more?

God could have created the earth in however many days God chose, the fact though is, he didn't create the world 6-10k years ago.

 

[A_Christian]

God covered up NOTHING. GOD does not spell out
everything that ever happened either. If you
don't wish to believe the FLOOD happened or
was the result of a meteor shower, etc., etc.,
etc., that is up to you.
Sodom was destroyed by brimstone and fire rained down in Egypt. Does GOD need to hit your imagination over the head?
(or does your imagination rest only in science
novels).

 

[Johnv]

God covered up NOTHING.
I used to be a YEC literalist, believing stanchly that the earth was created in 4004bc. Then I came to realize that the evidence simply didn't support that. If God created it 6000 years ago, and made it look like it was created over a longer period of time, then God is a devious God. I don't believe He is. If God created the earth over longer periods of time, then the only remaining scenario is that we're interpreting Genesis incorrectly. Historically, we've done that before, having thought that the earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around the earth.

GOD does not spell out everything that ever happened either.
True, but God doesn't hide evidence in a decietful manner, either.

If you don't wish to believe the FLOOD happened or was the result of a meteor shower, etc., etc., etc., that is up to you.
I'll believe it if the evidence supports it. It doesn't. There's no evidence of a meteor shower happening in quick succession in the last 6000 years. The Bible doesn't mention meteor showers during the Noah flood account, either.

 

[Meatros]

God covered up NOTHING. GOD does not spell out everything that ever happened either. If you don't wish to believe the FLOOD happened or was the result of a meteor shower, etc., etc., etc., that is up to you.

I prefer to use my intellect in determining what does and does not make sense. What you posit, does not make sense.

If the flood was the result of the tremendous meteor shower (cramming all the meteors in there, even though they absolutely did not occur at the same time) would result in the death of Noah, the Ark, and all the plant life around.

Sodom was destroyed by brimstone and fire rained down in Egypt. Does GOD need to hit your imagination over the head?
(or does your imagination rest only in science
novels).

Sure, Sodom could have been destroyed by a meteor, I'm not arguing that. However if sodom had been destroyed by one of the massive meteor's this thread is talking about, the rest of the world would have gone along with it.

Nice try though, unfortunately, your example doesn't cut the mustard.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Posted by Aefting:

Besides, you're not taking into account data that we CAN be sure about -- God's unequivocal testimoney in Ex. 20 that He created everything in 6 days.

Andy, is there something about the pictures of the moon and mercury I linked for us all that you are not sure about? Is there something about seeing with your own eyes that leaves things unclear for you?

 

[john6:63]

There was a detective in the ‘60s who was called to a cemetery, I believe in northern Miss. A grave was discovered that had been disturbed and a body was found within the grave. Doesn’t sound unusual that a body was found in a grave, but the body looked as though it had been placed there recently.

The body was that of a civil war solider and had been dead for over 100 yrs. Thus the “Body Farm” was born at the University of Tennessee, were scientists could study the effects of nature on a decaying body.

What does this have to do with the discussion? Man is fallible. He will make mistakes and his eyes can deceive him sometimes. The evidence the detective gathered was misinterpreted, he got it wrong.

 

[Meatros]

john6:63-Handwaving and ignoring the obvious isn't going to win your case. I'm not even arguing age, I'm arguing the impossibilities of YEC based on the destructive power of the many *huge* life-ending meteors that have crashed into this planet.

But the best you seem to be able to do is handwave and say "it's not true".

Cover you eyes, shield your ears, but the evidence is here and the best you can do is to ignore it?

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Meatros:
I prefer to use my intellect in determining what does and does not make sense. What you posit, does not make sense.

Do you prefer to use your intellect in determining what the Word of God says? If so, then I guess God was lying when it is mentioned there was no suffering or death until AFTER sin entered the Earth? Hmmmmmmm!

 

[Meatros]

Do you prefer to use your intellect in determining what the Word of God says? If so, then I guess God was lying when it is mentioned there was no suffering or death until AFTER sin entered the Earth? Hmmmmmmm!

Of course I do, if I didn't use my intellect, then how would I know what the word of God was? I'd be a mindless drone, just accepting whatever my preacher said.

AFA was God lying? I don't believe so, but then again, it appears as though you've mistaken me for a literal Genesis believer.

 

[john6:63]

Meatros

Quit flattering yourself. My comment above was directed to Paul’s comment.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Originally posted by Phillip:
Do you prefer to use your intellect in determining what the Word of God says? If so, then I guess God was lying when it is mentioned there was no suffering or death until AFTER sin entered the Earth? Hmmmmmmm!

The scriptures say that by one man death came "into the world." But why doesn't that merely mean death for Adam and Eve, instead of the animals? I consider it perfectly obvious he's talking about death for mankind, not death for microbes.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Originally posted by john6:63:
Meatros

Quit flattering yourself. My comment above was directed to Paul’s comment.

Hmmm. Isn't it true that your decision to accept the interpretation of scripture was a human decision (you being the human)? If so, then for what reason do you accept your human choice to view your particular literal interpretation of scripture as the word of God as being better founded than another's human choice to accept the evidence of his very own eyes in a matter of scientific endeavor?

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Meatros:
I'm not even arguing age, I'm arguing the impossibilities of YEC based on the destructive power of the many *huge* life-ending meteors that have crashed into this planet.

I will not claim to know all of the mechanics that God used to form the earth and all of the life in it- the Bible does not tell us this. The Bible does give us the time frame however and I accept that literally until two conditions are met: 1) there are scientific facts (not interpretations of evidence) that disprove the literal interpretation and 2) someone shows a biblical reason to believe that any part of Genesis is allegorical. The NT writers treat the creation account as fact and, with all due respect to you folks, I trust them more.

With respect to your contention, the biblical account doesn't have life appearing until the 3rd day. Again, I do not know the mechanics of how God formed the earth and celestial bodies and placed them in their proper places but I can imagine that it as a rather violent occasion.

For your premise to prove YEC an impossibility, you would have to establish that God worked only within the physical possibilities of the current natural world, that God's creative acts of the first two days cannot explain the evidence you cite, and that the explaination you adopt is somehow infallibly and exclusively correct.

 

[aefting]

Posted by Paul of Eugene:
Andy, is there something about the pictures of the moon and mercury I linked for us all that you are not sure about? Is there something about seeing with your own eyes that leaves things unclear for you?

I looked at the links but I'm not sure what you're getting at. The moon and Mercury have lots of impact craters. What's supposed to be unclear?

Posted by Meatros:
So God let the meteors hit earth, covered them up, made no biblical mention of it....for what purpose? Why?

There are lots of things that the Bible doesn't discuss -- doesn't mean those things didn't happen.

Posted by Paul of Eugene:
The scriptures say that by one man death came "into the world." But why doesn't that merely mean death for Adam and Eve, instead of the animals? I consider it perfectly obvious he's talking about death for mankind, not death for microbes.

I don't see how this distinction helps you, theologically. According to your view (I think), Adam would have had human parents that died. The Bible is clear, though, that the entire creation was thrown into the "bondage to decay (ESV)" through the sin of Adam (Rom. 8:19-22. Animals were killed to provide Adam and Eve clothing after they sinned -- I don't think that was just a coincidence.

Andy

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Originally posted by aefting:
The moon and Mercury have lots of impact craters. What's supposed to be unclear?

What's unclear is, given that the same impacts also occurred on earth, when in the YEC viewpoint was there an occasion this could have happened and yet allow life to survive? In standard science, most of it was over before life could evolve.

There are lots of things that the Bible doesn't discuss -- doesn't mean those things didn't happen.

But just a fraction of those would have been world shattering events comparable to the flood of Noah in their impact on humanity.

According to your view (I think), Adam would have had human parents that died. The Bible is clear, though, that the entire creation was thrown into the "bondage to decay (ESV)" through the sin of Adam (Rom. 8:19-22. Animals were killed to provide Adam and Eve clothing after they sinned -- I don't think that was just a coincidence.

In my personal opinion, Adam was the first human. His immediate parents were therefore pre-human. He was the one God chose to "breath the breath of life" by which he became a living soul, in the image of God. He was placed in the garden, where because of the divine nature implanted, he could have supernaturally escaped death except, of course, for the fall.

But naturally when I get to heaven I'll be anxious to ask him about more of the details.

 

[Meatros]

I will not claim to know all of the mechanics that God used to form the earth and all of the life in it- the Bible does not tell us this. The Bible does give us the time frame however and I accept that literally until two conditions are met: 1) there are scientific facts (not interpretations of evidence) that disprove the literal interpretation and 2) someone shows a biblical reason to believe that any part of Genesis is allegorical. The NT writers treat the creation account as fact and, with all due respect to you folks, I trust them more.

The scientific "facts" indicate that if the earth was 6k-10k years old, there would be no life on it (perhaps simple-celled organisms). If you prefer to be intellectually dishonest in the face of the evidence, that's your choice.

With respect to your contention, the biblical account doesn't have life appearing until the 3rd day. Again, I do not know the mechanics of how God formed the earth and celestial bodies and placed them in their proper places but I can imagine that it as a rather violent occasion.

You might have a point if all the meteor impacts happened at the same time, unfortunately for your position, they did not. Also, the impacts would leave the earth uninhabitable for more then three days. A lot more.

For your premise to prove YEC an impossibility, you would have to establish that God worked only within the physical possibilities of the current natural world, that God's creative acts of the first two days cannot explain the evidence you cite, and that the explaination you adopt is somehow infallibly and exclusively correct.

God obviously works within the natural laws God created. Therefore, unless God is lieing about the evidence God created, the earth is actually quite old.

 

[Meatros]

Seeing as Paul has answered your questions extremely well (IMO, and I'm sure not yours ), I'll just add this:

In my personal opinion, Adam was the first human. His immediate parents were therefore pre-human. He was the one God chose to "breath the breath of life" by which he became a living soul, in the image of God. He was placed in the garden, where because of the divine nature implanted, he could have supernaturally escaped death except, of course, for the fall.

But naturally when I get to heaven I'll be anxious to ask him about more of the details.

I agree with Paul here, with the addition of this: I think that God gave man incredible intelligence and the ability to recognize right from wrong and what not. That's what the difference is IMO. That's also why we are genetically close to chimps, very close, yet we are so radically different.

Then again, I don't think the point of Genesis was to describe the history and science of the creation of earth.