Young Universe Creationism Verses Old Universe Creation

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Fundamentalists of Christendom teach that the universe, including our earth
and all life on it, is only a few thousand years old. Those who teach this doctrine—
known as creationism—may have high regard for the Bible, but they contend that God created all
things in six days just a few thousand years ago.
They reject credible scientific evidence that contradicts their view.
As a result, the teaching of creationism actually discredits the Bible, making it appear unreasonable and inaccurate. Individuals who promote such views might remind us of some in the first century who had a
zeal for God “but not according to accurate knowledge.”
(Rom. 10:2)

Genesis 1:1 covers way more than what creationism claims, it covers everything right until God began to work on the planet earth that had already existed for eons.


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Something as simple as light from stars arriving at our planet millions of light years away disprove the young universe belief/theory as wrong.

Of coarse non-believers don't have to be convinced of this, this is more for believers that still cling to the young Universe idea.




posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I honestly do not know anyone who thinks the earth is only about six thousand years old. I think everyone knew that what they saw in the rocks was very old. Maybe the kings and rich people believed this but I think that the common person always figured this. Just because the common people didn't challenge tptb doesn't mean they believed everything that the church said.

It is like the Spanish people trying to tell everyone the earth was flat when it was known before by most people that it was a sphere. If you disagreed with the Spanish that conquered you, they would kill you and rape your woman. Heck, Some queen of Spain bragged she never took a bath many moons ago. No wonder she believed the world was flat. The Spanish did get a very strong immune system from their past ways though.

I don't believe the Universe is shaped like they think it is presently, I think it is growing like a crystal leaf, what we are seeing is something like atoms and molecules on a repeating basis. We could be microscopic compared to a much bigger world that we cannot see because it is so big. What would we look like from someone looking out within an atom.

Man can barely comprehend all the possibilities out there. Our universe could be part of the fingernail of a person we refer to as god.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


Yeah must admit even on ATS I have not heard anyone say the earth is only 6000 years old.
So If you do speak up so we can have a laugh



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Well its all infinite anyway, so they're both wrong.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   

boymonkey74
reply to post by rickymouse
 


Yeah must admit even on ATS I have not heard anyone say the earth is only 6000 years old.
So If you do speak up so we can have a laugh


You know you are right I have not heard it on ATS for a long time, because of the Christians I have interacted with on ATS they are of the more intelligent variety.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Blue_Jay33
Fundamentalists of Christendom teach that the universe, including our earth and all life on it, is only a few thousand years old. Those who teach this doctrineknown as creationism—may have high regard for the Bible, but they contend that God created all things in six days just a few thousand years ago.
They reject credible scientific evidence that contradicts their view.


The Fundamentalists (christian) are easily disputed. If the Universe lets narrow it down to this planet 400,000 years of human occupation is only a few thousand years old no one is testifying as to time frames WHO WAS THERE TO DOCUMENT (as a fully functioning Herodidus time traveling non-physical historian of the human) to observe its instantaneous creation; there would have to be someone you would think as official observer recorder of events, meaning SOMEONE HAD TO HAVE A UNIQUE PERSECTIVE (outside of the occuring) the 4th,5th,or 6th dimensional variety. Someone had to have been watching or overseeing OUTSIDE THIS BUBBLE.


Blue_Jay33
As a result, the teaching of creationism actually discredits the Bible, making it appear unreasonable and inaccurate. Individuals who promote such views might remind us of some in the first century who had a zeal for God “but not according to accurate knowledge.”


Creationism is more open minded and allows for 'the unknown factors of magick to occure', darwinism is an impure science describing evolutionary development (why dont 350 million year old Shark species rule the earth-you would think in that time frame would have evolved).


Blue_Jay33
Something as simple as light from stars arriving at our planet millions of light years away disprove the young universe belief/theory as wrong. Of coarse non-believers don't have to be convinced of this, this is more for believers that still cling to the young Universe idea.


Someone is hiding the truth from someone and WHY IS THAT; as much as we have pondered this same thing "where is God who is it and why does it continue to hide from us". WHY IS NO ONE ASKING THIS SIMPLE PRIMARY QUESTION? Who created us and why is it refusing to answer?
edit on 7-12-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I always find the 6000 years thing amusing, frankly it does not matter from a theological perspective.

What fundamentalist tend to forget is one very important part of the "creation" account is that everything up to Moses is a parable.

Its a retelling of history told to Moses by God, a very important detail, I could go into further detail explaining why its a parable (Has to do with Christ teaching method which was parable based.)

Its not a direct account, its a story told by the creator to a sheep herder and thats from a theological perspective.

What I find more interesting than the 6000 year thing, is the source of it, MOST of the "problems" the secular community has with Christian theology comes from beliefs that stem from the protestant reformation not going far enough from catholic doctrine, which is a whole other topic entirely.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Blue_Jay33
As a result, the teaching of creationism actually discredits the Bible, making it appear unreasonable and inaccurate.

That's hardly the only thing that makes the Bible appear unreasonable.


Of coarse non-believers don't have to be convinced of this, this is more for believers that still cling to the young Universe idea.



The 'Old Universe' Creationists merely modernized their beliefs in accordance to scientific discovery. Not that they found the 'proper interpretation' of the Bible. If the consensus of the science community was that the Universe was 6000 years old, the prevailing interpretation of the Bible would be 'Young Creationism'. The way people interpret and use the Bible is shaped by modern society. Same reason many of the morally reprehensible things in the Bible are either justified with some convoluted rationalization or omitted entirely. So much for its infallible nature.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 



which is a whole other topic entirely.

I have a strong feeling I would disagree with that.

Quite interested in seeing your argument there. Warrants a thread if you have the time



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 



(why dont 350 million year old Shark species rule the earth-you would think in that time frame would have evolved).


You're thinking in terms of 'human evolution' being the purpose of evolution. That if they evolved as much as us they would be zipping around in ferraris too. Sharks are highly evolved for their environment. They do rule the Earth, they just do so in the water as apex predators.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


You seem to lack understanding. Like I say your understanding of these terms are inadequate this book is ancient. Maybe 6 days didn't mean 6 revolutions of the Earth relative to the Sun. There's a lot it could have meant. A day could have signified a work day for God, who knows. God started the work day, finished it and decided it was good and then blam that day was over. The next day he did something perfect inside of the work he did the day before.

People that disbelieve in the bible or whatever who take it literally amuse me. Disregarding such an ancient widely regarded highly respected text seems foolish to me.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   
The young earth group always seem to over look a few things in scripture and then just count the who begat who. Some have the strange idea that God created the heavens and the angelic hosts on day 1, finished up on day 6 and took a break on day 7. Lucifer fell from grace on day 8 and caused Adam and Eve to bite the apple sometime before late afternoon and the rest was history.

When you do the math it just doesn't add up. It would take time for Lucifer to allow his pride to overcome him and then convince 1/3 of the heavenly host to follow him in rebellion and I'm sure it didn't happen over night. Then before Adam was even given Eve, he had time to observe all the animals and then name them according to their mannerisms. I doubt he did that in an afternoon. After that Eve is then made from a rib and given to Adam as a help meet and we are not told how long they were working in the garden before the story about Eve, a snake, a tree and an apple happens.

Since the lineages are set via patriarch, there can be many years between each one with those in between being left out. So there is no way to know the exact amount of time from Adam to Noah. Even Noah to the present is not exactly accurate either. Personally I look at it this way; if God wanted us to know the exact date of creation He would have told us but since He didn't I guess it's not all that important and people that argue over the age of the earth missed the point. It's not about any of that and wither it is 6000 years old or 6 billion years old really doesn't matter.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


There are actually quite a few on ATS. I wont name names.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   

On7a7higher7plane
God started the work day, finished it and decided it was good and then blam that day was over.


The fact that it took God any days to create the Universe implies something other the omnipotence. A truly omnipotent entity would have created the Universe, perfect, in an instant, not over the course of some metaphorical 'day'.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 

I've had... spirited discussions with a handful YECers (or YUCers, as Blue_Jay33 would put it) here on ATS who hold to the idea that the Earth is on the order of thousands of years old. Most of them end up citing good old Answers In Genesis and its strict Biblical literalism.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by On7a7higher7plane
 





You seem to lack understanding. Like I say your understanding of these terms are inadequate this book is ancient. Maybe 6 days didn't mean 6 revolutions of the Earth relative to the Sun. There's a lot it could have meant.


And you misunderstood the OP, I agree with your statement. God's days are not limited to our 24 hour periods.
One theory I have seen is that each creative Eon/Day was shorter than the last, yet that would indicate that the sixth day being the shortest was very long in itself as it included the dinosaurs too, it is very possible that the 6th day was around 200 million years, man and woman only created literally at the end of this day. This would indicate that the other periods were even longer, modern science and bible days can thus be reconciled.

reply to post by pstrron
 


FYI-years from Adam's creation is 6038. The Flood was in 2370 B.C.E.
You can figure this out by reading when people were born and at what age they had children and so on, it's all in the book of Genesis. Chapter 5 gives you an idea, Noah had his boys after he was 500, talk about having kids later in life.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   

iterationzero
reply to post by boymonkey74
 

I've had... spirited discussions with a handful YECers (or YUCers, as Blue_Jay33 would put it) here on ATS who hold to the idea that the Earth is on the order of thousands of years old. Most of them end up citing good old Answers In Genesis and its strict Biblical literalism.


As a christian myself (one who beleives in a very very very old Universe and Evolution) I find that website LOL. I just cant fathom how people beleive that tripe.



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Blue_Jay33
reply to post by On7a7higher7plane
 





You seem to lack understanding. Like I say your understanding of these terms are inadequate this book is ancient. Maybe 6 days didn't mean 6 revolutions of the Earth relative to the Sun. There's a lot it could have meant.


And you misunderstood the OP, I agree with your statement. God's days are not limited to our 24 hour periods.
One theory I have seen is that each creative Eon/Day was shorter than the last, yet that would indicate that the sixth day being the shortest was very long in itself as it included the dinosaurs too, it is very possible that the 6th day was around 200 million years, man and woman only created literally at the end of this day. This would indicate that the other periods were even longer, modern science and bible days can thus be reconciled.

reply to post by pstrron
 


FYI-years from Adam's creation is 6038. The Flood was in 2370 B.C.E.
You can figure this out by reading when people were born and at what age they had children and so on, it's all in the book of Genesis. Chapter 5 gives you an idea, Noah had his boys after he was 500, talk about having kids later in life.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)


The bible wasn't written by Christians or for creationist. It was written by Jews for Jews. Whatever you or other later Christian writers thought the authors of the bible meant, well, they are entitled to their opinion, but ultimately, their opinions are worth no more than yours or mine.

Trying to force fit the bible into a creationist framework is never going to be easy. It will never create a narrative that is free of contradictions.
Your problem is that in attempting to view the bible through creationist colored lens, you are unfailingly going to create a distorted picture, and only increase the number and severity of those pesky contradictions.
Much worse, you are allowing yourself to fool yourself into understanding the bible in creationist terms, something that I think is the single biggest error that creationist make in interpreting the bible



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 

Blue_Jay33, I've been remiss in not giving you proper you credit for opening this thread. It reminds me of the conclusion to a paper written by H. J. van Till, a professor at Calvin College:

Of far greater concern to me, however, is the negative effect that these episodes of misinformation may have on the Christian witness to a scientifically knowledgeable world. The world to which we direct the Christian message has every right to expect our scholarship, including our natural science, to be characterized by the highest standards of competence and integrity. If we publicly fail to maintain those standards, how can that world gain confidence in the message we proclaim? If we disseminate misinformation in the name of Christian scholarship, who will listen to our preaching of the gospel? More than fifteen centuries ago St. Augustine expressed this same concern in his commentary on Genesis:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size ... and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrasing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.... If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven ... ?" -- St. Augustine



posted on Dec, 8 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





The bible wasn't written by Christians


Really, who were all those guys who wrote the New Testament ?
They were followers of Christ, born into Judaism but ALL converts to Christianity. And if the scriptures written in the old testament about creation were false Jesus would have said something, because he was there and heavily involved in creation. He would have corrected the narrative that we have today. He didn't and it stands as is.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join