Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Why do you believe Earth is 6000 years old?

Pitbull15
Posts: 479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 2:38:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm not exactly a YEC myself, but I'm open to any explanations as to how and why you would come to that conclusion even with all the seemingly irrefutable evidence that says otherwise.
zmikecuber and I debate the Modal Ontological Argument
http://www.debate.org...

"YOU ARE A TOTAL MORON!!! LOL!!!- invisibledeity

"I have shown incredible restraint in the face of unrelenting stupidity."-Izbo10

"Oh my God, WHO THE HELL CARES?!"-Peter Griffin

"Let me put this in Spanish for you: NO!!"-Jase Robertson
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 4:34:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 2:38:16 AM, Pitbull15 wrote:
I'm not exactly a YEC myself, but I'm open to any explanations as to how and why you would come to that conclusion even with all the seemingly irrefutable evidence that says otherwise.

The fear of hell or damnation is usually the underlying reason, I would think.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2014 12:34:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/14/2014 2:38:16 AM, Pitbull15 wrote:
I'm not exactly a YEC myself, but I'm open to any explanations as to how and why you would come to that conclusion even with all the seemingly irrefutable evidence that says otherwise.
Well it's a good question.

There's certainly nothing appealing about a young earth or universe in and of itself for a YEC. I consider myself a YEC, but I don't hold to a view that OEC is by any means heretical, or even unorthodox. There are probably YECs who feel more strongly about it than I do.

I believe in YEC because for now I believe that the correct Biblical interpretation of the word day in Genesis literally refers to a solar day.

The way Ken Ham put it would involve asking someone why they believe in the resurrection of Christ. And upon the probable response of "because the Bible states it...", his following question would be "then why wouldn't you believe what the Bible states in regards to 6 literal days?". In other words, why would Christ's resurrection not be opened to interpretation, whereas the creation account in Genesis would?

However, this should depend on whether or not OECs base their view on the exact meaning of scripture, or on scientific evidence alone. And that I'm not sure of. I haven't looked into OEC theology enough to make that call. I don't know if some maintain that scripture directly states that the earth is old, or if they only maintain that scripture is silent on the subject (time having different references, perspectives in the Bible, etc.).

As far as actual science goes (as we shouldn't suggest that science itself should be left out of the equation) I would say that there's so many variables to consider that I don't think YEC should be discarded due to a very loud voice that claims that is should be.

For instance, many people relate the old geocentric theory in early European history to religion/Christianity. That Copernicus and Galileo were pioneers for secularism. But actually, geocentricism was a secular scientific theory embraced by the church in that day, just as evolution is embraced by many in churches today. And for that period of history, I'm sure the evidence seemed overwhelming.

One of the basic arguments against a young universe is the starlight problem. One of the basic arguments against an old universe is the horizon problem. One of the answers given for the horizon problem is the inflation theory. Ironically, both YEC and OEC require an alteration of the speed of light to solve both problems.

So there are problems in both proposals. God creating earth and the universe in 6 days or less would certainly not be a problem as far as His ability is concerned. The possibilities in the mechanics on how God created the universe in the supernatural sense are probably endless. But the rather derogatory reference to the supernatural element of creation goes something like this...."The only creationist argument is 'Goddidit!'" And of course that gives an unintellectual spin on it, and things can descend from there.

But as far as your personal belief, I fully respect it. I don't personally think the view of the age of the earth dictates one's Christian genuineness anymore than a number of other theological views that Christians differ on.