OEC v. YEC (Not a competition)

[archaeologist]

And Yet, somehow we are limiting God if we say that HE CHOOSE to wait during creation?

because the Bible tells us throughout its pages that he did it in a certain manner, not through a process but from His own personal efforts.

science does not overrule the Bible, if it did then God would not be God and God's word would be useless. what you are missing is the overall picture and what is at stake here.

[zoegirl]

Genesis says God did it, God did it in the way HE inteneded and in a certain order. It says that He did of HIs pure will, He said "Let there be", it happened. Doens't say HOW things happened when He said "Let there be"...

NO where does it include a detailed explanation for how, but that doesn't exclude that He did. It doesn't tell us that He made gravity, quarks, electrons, protons, cell membranes, DNA, RNA, black holes, nebula, friction, ribosomes, organelles, cycles, proteins.

Believe me I have read Genesis.

AS long as we stick to the first, then I agree with godslanguage, he would be overjoyed if we examine His creation.

[archaeologist]

NO where does it include a detailed explanation for how

Gen. 1:3 -- God spoke...; God separated...
1:6-- God spoke...; Sop God made..and separated...and it was so
1:9-- God spoke...; and it was so...
1:11--God spoke...; and it was so
1:14-- God spoke...;God made...; God set...
1:20--God spoke...; So God created...;
1:24--God spoke...;God made...'
1:27--God created...

looks pretty detailed to me. just because he doesn't give all the details of the ingrediants he used does it mean he used alternative methods. if God included all the details you want, the Bible would be so thick, no one would read it.

That isn't the purpose of the Bible, to give exact details as desired by scientists or archaeologists or biologists, etc. ITS purpose is to reveal God and what He did and who He is.

AS long as we stick to the first, then I agree with godslanguage, he would be overjoyed if we examine His creation

not if you credit what does not exist, belongs to and is used by evil to deceive man.

one other point--secular man decided to make the origination process take place over a long period of time (something they can't prove) it does not reflect God's power nor gives a person aninsight to what he can fully do.

when the believer adopts this they are undermining themselves and weaken their belief in God.

in contrast, if one looks at all that is in the world and sees that God did in6 days (24 hour ones) then they go , wow look at all the power He has. the believer now gets confidence that God is so powerful that there is nothing to fear, even the evil one.

there is a purpose and reason why creation was done in 6 24 hour days.

[Forum Monk]

there is a purpose and reason why creation was done in 6 24 hour days.

Yeah - law of the Sabbath - like I said in one of these threads somewhere which all end up talking about the same thing anyway.

[zoegirl]

Gen. 1:3 -- God spoke...; God separated...
1:6-- God spoke...; Sop God made..and separated...and it was so
1:9-- God spoke...; and it was so...
1:11--God spoke...; and it was so
1:14-- God spoke...;God made...; God set...
1:20--God spoke...; So God created...;
1:24--God spoke...;God made...'
1:27--God created...

looks pretty detailed to me. just because he doesn't give all the details of the ingrediants he used does it mean he used alternative methods. if God included all the details you want, the Bible would be so thick, no one would read it.

That isn't the purpose of the Bible, to give exact details as desired by scientists or archaeologists or biologists, etc. ITS purpose is to reveal God and what He did and who He is.

pretty detailed?!? No, absolutely not. You said it yourself, the bible would be ridiculously thick if He included it in His word. IT establishes God did it. and yes, His glory, His omnipotence...HIM!!

Again, how is wondering about the details somehow indicative of alternative method? In order to have an "alternative" method, one must have a clear method. God said He did it, not with which method HE did it. (YEs, I know HE did it with pure will)

Did He just "poof" things into existence? (not saying He couldn't, just one interpretation of His methods)

[archaeologist]

Did He just "poof" things into existence

according to genesis---YES.

IT establishes God did it

it also says --HOW

if i say 'i wrote an article' do you question How i did it? no you know from the words used how it was done. when the Bible says--God spoke and there was light, then from the words used you know how it took place.

do i have to tell you how i did it if you ask me? NO. neither does God if it is not germane to His purpose.

when the verse says 'God made... you have a pretty good idea what God did. there was no evolutionary process because the words 'after their kind' eliminate anything else. God fashioned them

let the secularists be distracted with non-sensical things, focus on why God gave you the knowledge and ability for science and use it for His purpose and not let yourself be distracted, how God put things together is not important in comparison to what can be healed or or cured or whatever.

focus on what God wants you to do get rid of secular thinking, etc., so you can hear clearly and act. there is so much you do not understand and are missing because you are focused on the wrong things.

[zoegirl]

Did He just "poof" things into existence

according to genesis---YES.

IT establishes God did it

it also says --HOW

if i say 'i wrote an article' do you question How i did it?

Actually, yes I would. I wouldn't doubt you wrote it, but it it were an author I enjoyed and were facinated by, I would love to think about how that author wrote. Ask any Englsh Lit teacher and they would agree. I would want to know how you put together your thoughts, how you analyzed, how you put together your arguments. What was your creative process? Why did you choose this word? What was the impact of this sentence structure? IF you had done this or that differently, what would this mean?


A mechanic can tell me that he built this car....While I wouldn't doubt him, I would certainly be fascinated in his engineering....Why build it this way? Why does this combustion engine work? What forces are in play. And if he told me he not only put it together but built the parts and even created the elements and forces that were keeping the car together? How cool is that....I certainly would be interested.

I can hear a symphony and say Beethoven wrote this. Would I be doubting to examine how he put together this theme or that theme? Why this theme works with this symphony and why that theme works for that symphony? How beautiful each symphony is in its own way and yet beethoven's touch can be seen through each.

A painting can be a Van Gogh or a Da Vinci or a Rembrandt and we don't worry when people examine how they paint, why they choose certain colors.

And why is so problematic when we wonder if God choose to rewrite DNA NOT BECAUSE OF A MISTAKE, but simply because He choose to.

Thousands of books are written simply to compare the creative processes of Shakespeare, Hemingway, Jane Austen....or simply analyzing their writing style.

no you know from the words used how it was done. when the Bible says--God spoke and there was light, then from the words used you know how it took place.

But why in the world can't we think about photons and their forces and how light travels, and what God did with it?

do i have to tell you how i did it if you ask me? NO. neither does God if it is not germane to His purpose.

No, agreed, God doesn't have to tell us...He does reveal His mysteries in the discoveries that have been made. But neither do I think He is a miser hoarding His glories and Magnificence! LOok, every good discovery that we have made was made because God allowed, no, choose to let that discovery be made. Are there evil forces that work, absolutley.

when the verse says 'God made... you have a pretty good idea what God did. there was no evolutionary process because the words 'after their kind' eliminate anything else. God fashioned them

I agree that God fashioned them....
In another thread I compared God to a musician writing a symphony. If God choose to use previous symphonies to develop new symphonies, then how does that negate each as a unique creation? But God would be a perfect creator, knowing what organism will be. I am not saying that God started it in the hopes that somthing good would happen. Good grief, we always bring up that there are similarities between organisms because God designed them all.

let the secularists be distracted with non-sensical things, focus on why God gave you the knowledge and ability for science and use it for His purpose and not let yourself be distracted, how God put things together is not important in comparison to what can be healed or or cured or whatever.

Discussing God is non-sensical?!?

Ah, but many, many Christian scientists are already doing this and you have criticized them for giving in to secularist methods.

[archaeologist]

And why is so problematic when we wonder if God choose to rewrite DNA NOT BECAUSE OF A MISTAKE, but simply because He choose to.

the creative process was finished on the 6th day, He did not redo anything:

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

when God says it is finished, it is finished.

But why in the world can't we think about photons and their forces and how light travels, and what God did with it?

if it leads you away from God then it is wrong.

Discussing God is non-sensical?!?

never said that.

In another thread I compared God to a musician writing a symphony

i disagreed with those analogies, i just don't have the energy to deal with them right now. suffice me to ask one question:

what does knowing exactly how help you ? when God heals someone, do you ask How? would that information be helpful to the health of a person? will it change their healing? their life? will it help you for the next miracle? no.

if you look at Jesus' ministry you will see that how is never asked when a miracle was performed, it isn't important. it is the fact that He did it.

was it the mud made from spit, the stretching forth of the hand, the lowering of a friend through the roof? no. it was God's power and exactly how is not germane to the issue.

what is germane is the faith of the sick person, the action of the sick person and that God had the power to do so and that He did it.

[zoegirl]

And why is so problematic when we wonder if God choose to rewrite DNA NOT BECAUSE OF A MISTAKE, but simply because He choose to.

the creative process was finished on the 6th day, He did not redo anything:

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

when God says it is finished, it is finished.

But why in the world can't we think about photons and their forces and how light travels, and what God did with it?

if it leads you away from God then it is wrong.

Discussing God is non-sensical?!?

never said that.

In another thread I compared God to a musician writing a symphony

i disagreed with those analogies, i just don't have the energy to deal with them right now. suffice me to ask one question:

what does knowing exactly how help you ?

Yours is a rather weak arguement...why shouldn't we do this?!?

...for the same reason examining a painting or symphony helps us understand or at the very least appreciate the artist or composer....

Well, I tried in another post to explain how htis helps me personally to marvel and amaze and God but you accused me of being focused on myself.

when God heals someone, do you ask How? would that information be helpful to the health of a person? will it change their healing? their life? will it help you for the next miracle? no.

if you look at Jesus' ministry you will see that how is never asked when a miracle was performed, it isn't important. it is the fact that He did it.

was it the mud made from spit, the stretching forth of the hand, the lowering of a friend through the roof? no. it was God's power and exactly how is not germane to the issue.

what is germane is the faith of the sick person, the action of the sick person and that God had the power to do so and that He did it.

Not disagreeing with any of this. Still aren't showing why we can't wonder about these things.

Why are we switching from creation to healing? God may heal however He wants. I'll not question, I'll marvel.


The rewriting of the DNA , by the way, was a reference to His creative acts within the "6 day" or whateever time period we want to use.


But this brings up an intersting question...your response leads to the conclusion that God changing DNA after the 6th day would be in violation of His finished work.

In healing a cancer patient, would you say that God corrects the genes that are causing the cancer? IF so, wouldnt this be God changing His creation?
If you disagree, please explain why

[archaeologist]

Yours is a rather weak arguement...why shouldn't we do this?!?

not really, just tired of your hanging on to what is not right. you miss the point because you want to focus on what you want not what He wants.

I tried in another post to explain how htis helps me personally to marvel and amaze and God but you accused me of being focused on myself.

still do.

Why are we switching from creation to healing

it was an example.

The rewriting of the DNA , by the way, was a reference to His creative acts within the "6 day" or whateever time period we want to use.

are you saying that God made a mistake and had to rewrite? not scriptural if so. God made it all perfectly and it was good. no rewriting needed.

Still aren't showing why we can't wonder about these things

you are wasting energy, wasting time, not listening to God, opening the door to let evil in... do i need to continue?

In healing a cancer patient, would you say that God corrects the genes that are causing the cancer

that is healing, the peson can still contract cancer in later years. different thng altogether. i know a person that was healed of arthritis twice. did God make a mistake the first time? no. he was healed both times. healing does not make us immune.

IF so, wouldnt this be God changing His creation?

not at all. cancer is still in the world, God removed it from the person, He did not eliminate it from existence.

[Enigma7457]

I find it almost comical the way these threads constantly spiral out of control. We continually attack each other rather than actually debating, in a civil, christian way, the topic. We were supposed to be discussing OEC v. YEC (still not a competition).

I am getting a headache with the way we keep going. Seriously. I just took a couple of advil.

I propose we return to the topic and attempt to discuss with each other why we believe what we believe...

Okay, i'll start.

I believe in an old earth (if this contradicts the bible, please expain in great detail or i will simply ignore whatever argument is presented). I believe it can be fit within the frameworks of creation in bible (again, details if contradictions).

So, lets continue on without convicting each other. If God wants us convicted, he'll handle that part. After all, it is his job.

Thank you very much

*Disclaimer: This post was not in direct assault at anyone. I, as well as others, have engaged in conduct not befitting the above statements. However, let us not point fingers.

[Forum Monk]

Okay, i'll start.

I believe in an old earth (if this contradicts the bible, please expain in great detail or i will simply ignore whatever argument is presented). I believe it can be fit within the frameworks of creation in bible (again, details if contradictions).

I will continue.
Before I make any comment about OEC vs YEC I would like to make a few points:

• 1. Traditional interpretation has been 6 day creation, about 6000+ years ago. I point this out because there is historical precendence to the interpretation.
  2. There is a gap theory (a billions+ years gap between Gen1:1 - Gen1:2) which suggests old earth but the writings of Rich Deem discount it.
  3. Supporters of OEC now, mostly lean on the day-age concept, basically the hebrew word 'yom' could mean some indefinite period of time. Again, Deem makes his case to support this definition.

Other ideas exist, variable light speed, day is a "God" day which are not all that popular, and the idea of progressive creationism does not necessary fall into any particular of the above listed belief systems as in my opinion, progressive creationism is another thread topic altogether.

So you have the literal, historical translation, or you have an inference, or you have a retranslation. Do you think that about sums up the major positions?

[Forum Monk]

Continuing -

Again, before I give my opinion, I would like the readers of this thread to answer a couple of questions.

Since the idea of OEC is a fairly recent construct (no one prior to 1800 thought the bible suggested an old earth), what is the question Christians are trying to answer with this theory? And who is asking the question?

[Enigma7457]

So you have the literal, historical translation, or you have an inference, or you have a retranslation. Do you think that about sums up the major positions?

I think the three listed are the ones most relevent to this thread. i don't what progressive creation is and will have to look that up.

Since the idea of OEC is a fairly recent construct (no one prior to 1800 thought the bible suggested an old earth), what is the question Christians are trying to answer with this theory? And who is asking the question?

The questions christians are trying to answer is simple: How old is the Earth? Some might be trying get to deeper meanings, but i'm just curious.
Oh, and right now i am the one asking the question.

[Forum Monk]

Ok, good. At least according to you and I there are three belief systems. That can narrow it down a bit. (I would like to get some other opinions - how 'bout it people?)

Also let me rephrase the question a bit. Is it fair to say, you want to know how old the earth is, because you doubt the 6000-10000 year literal interpretation, because you have some other evidence it is older?

The reason I am asking this, lets be frank, is because I want to establish that we would not be wondering were it not for scientific investigation discoveries and theories. I mean, it is not a philosophical or theological doubt.