Skip to comments.Old Earth Belief
Posted on 12/22/2011 6:33:49 AM PST by truthfinder9
Have you ever been to a church that claimed that the earth is young? Have you ever felt pressured into believing in a young earth, even though you felt the scientific evidence was contrary to a young earth? Have you ever thought that in order to be a Christian, you had to deny science, and believe in young earth creation science? You are not alone. Many churches teach that the earth is young, and many require you to profess this belief through their statement of faith, which includes a world that was created in six 24-hour days. No, you are definitely not alone...millions have been driven away from the church, and Christ, because of this very topic.
However, there is no need for this to happen. You can believe in an old earth and be a Christian. The doctrine of salvation has nothing to do with the age of the earth. The Bible does not say, Believe in a young earth, or be condemned to hell. You can become a Christian and believe in an old earth.
Want to learn more? This website is here to help you. Let's start with a basic explanation of old earth theology. There are several major positions one can take with regards to belief in an old earth and universe. Using a simplistic view of old earth creationist beliefs, they can basically be split into two groups, those who hold to a Day-Age Interpretation, and those who believe in the Gap Theory
(Excerpt) Read more at answersincreation.org ...
Prove to me that today is thursday.
Exactly. The bible gives an account of all the decendents of Adam and how long they lived as well as Moses. It can be calculated. It can not be true. But there is an even bigger problem in Genesis in that there are two contradictory stories of Creation. Now either it happened one way or the other but not both ways.
That definitely impossible...One or the other is true...Truth isn't relative...
but yes, you can chose either and still be a Christian...Siding with the Old Earth scenario however, makes you blind to and ignorant of a multitude of OT prophecies concerning the return of Jesus Christ...
But, what ever floats your boat...
I do...Peter gave us the answer...
God says he will preserve his words forever...Do you believe him???
I'll be your huckleberry.
How about those of us who insist on a literal interpretation of ancient Hebrew words, which haven't changed in over 5,000 years? Want to explain why `ereb boqer 'echad yowm doesn't actually mean `ereb boqer 'echad yowm? For your reference, that's "...and the evening and the morning were the first day." in English.
Our understanding of science needs to catch up to Scripture, not the other way around. The events recorded in Genesis don't defy reason and evidence, but our understanding of science hasn't caught up yet with the record of what happened. We're getting there though, as someone above mentioned. Relativity is dependent upon the point of reference. To us, things may look billions of years old but to the one who created it, it's only a little under 6,000 years old. So which is correct? Are we right, because we can look and say "looks billions of years old" or is God right because He said "I created it a little less than 6,000 years ago"?
Maybe the Virgin Birth was a metaphor...How would you know???
He didn't say that truth was relative, he said that our understanding of truth was relative. We see it from the point of view of those who live here, in this moment of time and thereby are subject to the same things which make the Creation appear to be older than what it is. God, who is outside of time, left a record that says it was only a little less than 6,000 years ago that he did all this.
Wrong. Einstein's general theory of relativity says both can definitely be true simultaneously. GPS systems recognize this fact and must be adjusted to account for it.
Would you say the Ten Commandments are to be taken literally?
Because the earth was in darkness for many millions of years. It underwent quite a transformation from its original self.
Science is a method and we understand it very well. Science deals with objective reality. The fact that we can launch a rocket and have it meet up with and orbit another planet, much less land a rover on the surface more or less where we want to is proof that we have a handle on the scientific method. It is silly to argue that the earth is only thousands of years old. That flies in the face of objective reality. There are so many contradictions in Genesis that it can not be taken literally unless there is no such thing as an objective reality or God is an irrational being who wants to confuse us and torment us. I can’t believe either.
“Would you say the Ten Commandments are to be taken literally?”
I would say the Ten Commandments are a great moral philosophy to live by. Whether or not there was a historical Moses and whether or not God literally gave him those orders is really inconsequential. I believe there is enough evidence of the Arc of the Covenant’s existence to give credence to the story, and the historical event would have happened around 1500 BC when records would have been easier to keep after technological advancements as opposed to during say the Biblical flood period, but if it turned out to be a myth it would be inconsequential to my belief in Christianity.
Written in the style of the day, a thousand years is not the indication of a specific time but indicates more than a man can imagine.
The Virgin Birth is a point of faith and therefore needs no proof. You believe or you do not.
Actually that occurs in Revelation when He will make everything right forever.
I agree, we do understand science very well, as it functions at this point in space and time. The problem is that there is no way to confirm that our assumptions about the past are true due to the fact that there's no way to actually truly verify the past. Yes, we can take note of things and make educated assumptions based upon those notes, but there is a certain limit to our understanding that is due to our inability to see time as a whole.
Now, you stated that there are contradictions in Genesis. Care to provide an example?
Believing in Billions of years doesn't make you a non Christian, it just makes you wrong. Many different denominations have varying beliefs. They are still Christians. We won't know for sure until we die, but the evidence for a young earth is in the bible and in science.
There are many Christian scientists (small “s”, not the denomination, but actual scientists). They dispute the secular scientist's views. Science first needs to be defined. What qualifies as science these days is a joke. I like double blind studies and actual FACTS, instead of “theories”. Much of so called science today is nothing but theory and computer models.
You might find this informative:
Are you talking about the Gap theory, which states that there's a gap of an unknown amount of time between the first sentence of Genesis 1:2 and the second sentence of that same verse?