Non-refutation in "Refutation of YECism from Scriptures"

[KDulcimer]

I came across this PDF some time back and as I read it, I thought "This is considered a refutation? Oh, come on. This is just a restatement of OECist beliefs. There's nothing in here that actually addresses real YECist claims." So here, for your entertainment and/or edification, is my response to http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... ionism.pdf.

Summary: The PDF in no way demonstrates how YEC is internally inconsistent or serves as a refutation of YECism-- it merely attempts to interpret the Bible in a OEC fashion.

Claim 1: Light is from the Sun (created in verse 1), since there is "day" & "night"
Response: Verse 1 doesn't say God created the Sun. It says He created "the heavens and the earth". Light is created in verse 3 (day 1). God created all stars, including the sun, on day 4. Verse 16 says God created "two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night." So the plainest interpretation of Genesis has the sun being created on day 4 of the creation week.
Faulty presumption: There was light, therefore the sun must have been in existence. (However, Genesis 1 says light preceded the sun.)

Claim 2: Expanding Universe
Response: How is this incompatible with YECism? YECists believe in an expanding universe-- it fits perfectly with the concept of there being a "young" universe.
Faulty presumption: YECists don't believe in an expanding universe.

Claim 3: Earth was dark because of clouds
Response: Again, this is no refutation of YECism.

Claim 4: Primordial global sea
Response: The above claim references 2 texts, Genesis 1:2 and Psalm 104:6. I don't know how much room Genesis 1:2 allows for the earth being a global sea, as the earth was "formless". If I were to try to interpret this verse from a OECist perspective, I would think v. 2 is very shortly after the Big Bang. Verses 9 & 10 describe the separation of water and dry land. Maybe the author got verses 2 & 9 confused?
Psalm 104:6 is not clear as to exactly what it is describing-- it could be the earth as in Genesis 1:1 or it could be describing the earth during the global flood.
Fault: Eisegesis, or confusion.

Claim 5: Dry land
Response: Again, this is no refutation of YECism.

Claim 6: Global sea
Response: Again, this is no refutation of YECism.

Claim 7: Local, not global, flood
Response: Three texts are referenced: Ps. 104:9, Job 38:10, Proverbs 8:29. What’s interesting is that Psalm 104:9 clearly says “never again will [the waters] cover the earth”. If anything, this is further evidence that the flood was global! The only way the above text could be indicating a local flood is if the Psalmist lived before Noah. Job 38:10 and Proverbs 8:29 both talk about setting limits for the sea-- but this is poetic language, and to take the language as absolute is poor hermeneutics to say the least.
Faulty presumption: Poetry can be understood in a literal manner.

Claim 8: The land produced trees from seed, which grew to produce fruit-- obviously taking longer than 24 hours
Response: “Obviously”? Really? How is this a refutation of YECism? If a YECist believes that God created the earth in a day, how is it problematic to also believe that God created full-grown fruit trees? Second, the text does not say the land produced trees from seed-- it simply says “the land produced vegetation”. God also created Adam from the dust of the earth, so how is it problematic to say God made the land produce vegetation?
Faulty presumption: Eisegesis and "How things are is how they have always been".

Claim 9: The primordial clouds cleared to reveal the Sun, moon, and stars, already created in verse 1. Revealed to mark off the seasons.
Response: The claim is contrary to the passage cited.
Faulty presupposition: More eisegesis.

Claim 10: God provides food for the carnivores, refuting young earth vegetarianism.
Response: The verses cited are talking about a post-fall world.
Faulty presupposition: How things are is how they have always been.

Claim 11: The laws of the universe rule over the earth, refuting geocentrism and different pre-fall physics.
Response: First, YECism does not assert, confirm, or in any way give credence to geocentrism. Nice straw man there. Second, the claim as a whole hangs specifics (geocentrism, pre-fall physics) on a broad piece of text: “Do you know the laws of the heavens? Can you set up God’s dominion over the earth?”
Faulty presupposition: How things are is how they have always been, particulars can be deduced from broad pieces of text.

Claim 12: The sixth day is obviously longer than 24 hours. God created the land carnivores (“wild animals”) and herbivores (“livestock”) and Adam, the first man. Then He planted a garden, let it grow, and placed Adam in the garden to care for it.God brought the animals before Adam for him to name all of them. Finally, God put Adam to sleep and created Eve from his side.
Response: Again, “obviously”? Is God too small to do a lot of stuff in one day? The Bible never says Genesis 2 is a description of day 6. Rather, Genesis 2 is a recap of the creation story, “zooming in” on God’s final creation: man. At the end of Genesis 1, it’s as if the author stops and says “Okay, I’ve given the overview of the creation week and how everything got started. Now let’s zoom in on man and start on that story.”
Second, the PDF author is ignorant of YECist beliefs and has thereby presented a straw man. Adam would not have had to name lions, then tigers, then tabby cats, then Siamese cats-- he probably would have just had one breed, one “kind” to name. Same goes for hyenas, dogs, foxes, wolves, and coyotes. All these have probably simply differentiated (through natural and artificial selection) from a single, original “kind”.
Faulty presupposition: The author presumes long ages to prove long ages-- circular reasoning.

Claim 13: Adam’s response to seeing Eve was “at last,” indicating that he had waited a long time for a partner-- certainly longer than 24 hours.
Response: Taking Adam’s “at last" as proof that he waited > 24 hours for a partner is pure eisegesis. Also, see previous response about the difference in time between Genesis 1 and 2.
Fault: Poor hermeneutics, eisegesis.

Claim 14: Again, God endorses carnivorous activity and provides food for the carnivores, refuting young earth vegetarianism.
Response: God ordained carnivorous activity after the fall.
Fault: Again, this is no refutation of YECism.

Claim 15: God created numerous species of plants and animals over the history of life on earth in order to prepare it for human habitation. Psalm 104 suggests that God renewed the earth after each mass extinction event by creation of new species. The long history of life on earth has produced massive bio deposits and ores that have facilitated human civilization.
Response: The Psalm makes no such indication.
Fault: Complete eisegesis.

[twinc]

The Bible absolutely confirms a young earth - see recent research inn the book "The Plan" by Jeff Swanson or via internet see www.planbible.com - twinc

[RickD]

The Bible absolutely confirms a young earth - see recent research inn the book "The Plan" by Jeff Swanson or via internet see http://www.planbible.com - twinc

And twinc is back. In full force. Twinc, by chance did you go to the " school of young earth is equal to scripture" that Ken Ham attended?