How is it so?

[Biologos101]

I know it's an old post, but still, I asked that there be no debates in this thread.

You can't have the "facts" without debate. Someone is always going to disagree with the "facts". And even disagreeing with the "facts" by presenting your own "facts" is going to be debating.

[Chaotic Void]

You can't have the "facts" without debate. Someone is always going to disagree with the "facts". And even disagreeing with the "facts" by presenting your own "facts" is going to be debating.

You don't have to debate to state your case as to why you believe what you believe.

[TolkienFan]

Biologos101

You can't have the "facts" without debate. Someone is always going to disagree with the "facts". And even disagreeing with the "facts" by presenting your own "facts" is going to be debating.

If you read the OP, you would have seen that I meant "facts" in the sense of the facts of how you came to your position. Whether or not you agree with the person, you don't have to debate them when they're simply saying how they came to their position. A good example is KBertsche's first post in this thread. He disagreed with my old YEC position on the days of Genesis, but he respected my wishes of not debating in the thread, but linked to a rebuttal. If you want to debate, please do so in another thread.

[jordanriver]

It has falsified it by proving the earth is more the 10,000 years old. It has falsified it by proving that everything came from a common ancestor. It does not have to be science for science to falsify it. Geocentric model is not real science, but has been falsified by proving the sun is the center of our solar system.

Respecting the wishes of TolkienFan in the OP, I am going to attempt to address your reply in a new thread I've titled "Where Does It Say That In THE BIBLE?"

JR

[gluadys]

The literal week definition also makes sense of the case where the Creation Week is used as a pattern for the work week of Israel in Exodus 20:8-11 (and expansions on this thereafter in Leviticus).

So does the metaphorical week.

I don't really see why a literal week is any better at making sense of the commandment to observe the Sabbath than a symbolic one.

As for how I came by my views you can put the blame on two Christians, one whose name you know, one you won't.

The name you won't know is that of my high-school geography teacher. Geography, of course, doesn't really cover geology, but it does cover major land formations such as mountain ranges and resources such as coal and oil. As he was discoursing on some such topic (to which I was paying little attention as I found the whole subject a complete bore) it did occur to me that he took an old earth for granted.

I might not have noticed, as everyone I knew took an old earth for granted, but recently I had been reading some creationist literature so this time I took note. I also took note that he was a Christian. I knew he attended church, sang in the choir and was staff advisor to the Bible Club.

That satisfied me that an old earth was not problematical for a Christian.

The name you will know is C. S. Lewis. I was reading Mere Christianity and in one passage he speaks of "true myth" of how the ancient stories of Israel were, like those of their neighbours, myths, but while the other myths were false, God had given Israel true myths. And the light switched on. If myths could be true without being history, then there is no conflict between a scientific view of nature and the tales of scripture.

So that led me to a way of understanding and interpreting scripture that I have found very fruitful and satisfying. In many ways I think it gets to the profundity of scriptural teaching better than literalism.

[Captain America]

Since I am new to the board, even the old threads are new to me. My belief in a YEC comes not from my interpretation of Genesis nor my knowledge of "indisputable" science. Both my exegesis and theoretical proofs could be wrong. My belief comes from what I hear Jesus saying about the OT stories in the NT. He appears to be confirming a literal Adam and Eve, an actual global flood that destroyed everyone except eight people, and a man surviving for three days after being swallowed by a big fish. All of these stories would seem pretty improbable to me, but if Jesus validates them, I am with him. I will stop here to honor the "no debate" request.

[onefour1]

I hold to the literalism of the 7 days of creation but do not believe that the earth itself was created within the 7 days. Nor do I believe that the 7 days are 7 of our days but 7 days according to the reckoning of time of 1000 to 1.

Gen 1:1-2 tells us that the earth and it's heaven were created in the beginning. Not during the seven days. After the heaven and the earth were created, God said let there be light and there was light. From that time forward were the 7 days reckoned. Each morning and evening were considered a day. The light came after the creation of the earth and it was by the dividing of this light from darkness that the days were then reckoned. Notice that the light that was used to reckon the days was not our sun. Our sun was placed in relation to our earth on the 4th day of these 7 days of creation. The light used to reckon the 7 days of creation was not from our sun.

2 Pet. 3: 8
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I believe this applies to the 7 days of creation. In other words, each day of the creation was about 1000 years of our time. So in my estimation, the 7 days of creation were about 7000 years of our time. I believe the temporal existence of this earth will be approximately the same.

[HELLBOY]

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: Sparko

this area is for Christians only

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.