Free Republic

Hugh Ross Church Fathers: Old earther admits “poor quality” research by other old-earthers Published: 13 July 2017 (GMT+10) From time to time we receive emails from devotees of Dr Hugh Ross, probably today’s leading advocate of old-earth creationism. Please note that we take no pleasure in highlighting the following matters. But for the sake of integrity in the creation movement (the brand of creation promoted by Ross is called ‘Progressive Creationism’), we need to address challenges by devotees of Ross as if he is a source of infallible wisdom.

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...

If you're in a room of 100 people, odds are likely about 40 think God created humans about 10,000 years ago, part of a philosophy called creationism, according to a Gallup poll reported Friday (Dec. 17). That number is slightly lower than in years past and down from a high of 47 percent in both 1993 and 1999. And 38 percent of Americans, the poll estimates, believe God guided the process that brought humans from "cavemen" to today's incarnation over millions of years, while 16 percent think humans evolved over millions of years, without any divine intervention. This secular view,...

Warning! It is not with much joy that I have created this page. It was created in response to attacks and complaints about my position on the age of the Earth by fellow Christians. My purpose in writing this page is not to create controversy or division within the Christian community or even convert you to an Old-Earth viewpoint if you take a Young-Earth stance. I do feel it is important that those who are adamant that the young-earth position is the only biblical interpretation of Genesis look at the rather formidable scriptural problems in their interpretation before judging others...

Introduction The standard young earth paradigm says that God originally created the heavens and earth as a perfect paradise in which God's image bearer, mankind, was to live. However, Adam and Eve's sin resulted not only in the fall of mankind, but the fall of creation itself to its current imperfect state. The fall of creation is usually attributed to the curse - God's judgment on mankind and His perfect world.1 Changes attributed to God's judgment include the initiation of death for both mankind and animals, the creation of weeds, parasites, disease, carnivorous activity, and any other aspect of creation...

The clash between young-earth and old-earth creationists can seem bewilderingly technical at times. Is there any easy-to-understand scientific data for determining whether Earth is young or old?In recent months, new evidence has emerged that may be simple enough for everyone to understand, regardless of science background-as simple as counting tree rings.Scientists are learning much about Earth's past by drilling deep into its surface-both ice and rock-with specialized instruments to remove long cylinders, or "core" samples. Six deep ice cores and one sediment core now provide a clear and continuous record of Earth's history. The ice cores reveal hundreds of thousands...

Biblical creation impedes evangelism? Plus yet another uninformed atheist. Published: 4 April 2009 First, Matthew P, a Christian evolutionist from the UK asserts that young-earth creation is harmful to evangelism. Dr Jonathan Sarfati shows the opposite, and explains the baneful consequences to the Gospel of denying its foundation in Genesis. Then Nigel H, an atheist from the US, hurls elephants about science and asserts that God deceived us and set up Adam and Eve to fail. Dr Sarfati explains some of the science and why God did NOT entrap the first couple...

An Overview of Day-Age's Errors by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D. Many Bible scholars today are buying into the day-age theory of origins. They seem to believe that their biblical views must conform to their mental image of how the world functions today and must be confirmed by members of the non-Christian world, whose minds are darkened (Ephesians 4:17-19). The basis of the day-age interpretation of long ages rests on a flawed understanding of the use of the word yom in Genesis 1 and 2. Here, I will discuss briefly the theory's five main errors...

Approximately five million years ago, the Mediterranean Sea dried up after it was sealed off from the Atlantic Ocean. According to earth scientist Rob Govers of Utrecht University, a reduction in the weight on the Earth's crust led to the Straits of Gibraltar moving upwards. Govers will publish his conclusions in the February issue of the earth sciences journal Geology. Much like a mattress springs back into shape after you get off it, the Earth's crust moves upwards when sea levels fall. Known as isostasy, this phenomenon explains how the Mediterranean Sea was sealed off from the Atlantic Ocean five...

Books claiming that science disproves ‘young-earth’ creationism are very common, and books that claim the Bible itself does not mandate a literal interpretation of the first few chapters of Genesis are not in short supply either. David Snoke’s book A Biblical Case for an Old Earth ostensibly falls in the latter group, though his main reason for rejecting biblical creation is really uniformitarian ‘science’. Books like these generally don’t pose a threat to informed creationists, and this one is no exception. In fact, Snoke could have saved himself a lot of trouble if he had actually taken the time to...

On Sunday September 25th, the Washington Post published a story called "In Evolution Debate, Creationists Are Breaking New Ground." Out of all the potential stories about Christians out there -- murderous persecutions in China, enslavement of Christians in Africa, the role of Christians in the Katrina cleanup -- the Washington Post chose to write this one.Young Earth Creationists hold a very narrow construct of the Bible and claim that the earth is only 6,000 or so years old. I don't buy into that construct for the following scientifuc reasons: We have earthly evidence that contradict the idea of a 6,000-year...

The father of modern young-earthism, Henry Morris, made a number of criticisms about intelligent design in his review of the book The Design Revolution. Some of it included the normal accusations of intelligent design theorists of not being faithful to the Bible (i.e. read: "They don't accept young-earthism like we told them to"). William A. Dembski replies in, "Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris."

Dr. Carl Wieland shows the incredible scientific invalidity of the young-earth view in his article "Still soft and stretchy." The article discusses the discovery of soft tissue from a dinosaur. Wieland exclaims this is a “stunning rebuttal” of the old age of the Earth. He then accuses scientists of never finding it before because of “the overriding belief in ‘millions of years’” has “blinded researchers” to such finds. What a joke. How does one find like this overturn thousands of old-age evidences? It does not, nor does Wieland attempt to explain why it would. This is the famous fallacy of...

NEW YORK (AP) -- A new analysis of bones unearthed nearly 40 years ago in Ethiopia has pushed the fossil record of modern humans back to nearly 200,000 years ago -- perhaps close to the dawn of the species. Researchers determined that the specimens are around 195,000 years old. Previously, the oldest known fossils of Homo sapiens were Ethiopian skulls dated to about 160,000 years ago. Genetic studies estimate that Homo sapiens arose about 200,000 years ago, so the new research brings the fossil record more in line with that, said John Fleagle of Stony Brook University in New York,...

Young-earthism continues to be a stumbling block on the debates over origins. While more and more people turn to old-earth creationism/intelligent design as they find it to be the only way to defeat naturalistic evolution & adhere to the infallibility of the Bible, many continue to blindly subscribe to YEC beliefs. Below are some examples of the inane items prinited in some YEC circles, in particular in Creation magazine. The young-earth quarterly magazine Creation has been described as "a cross between the Flat Earth Society Journal and the National Enquirer." Here is some of the wild pseudoscience presented in the...

Why Young-earth Creationism is Patently Absurd http://www.geocities.com/darrickdean/absurd.html