Dr. S has the correct approach here by the way. But may I inform you all of something? This is not new to me. I have favored an old universe since my science days in college. (I said ‘college’ so now you know how old I really am). When the first COBE images came out, I magnified God! Beautiful I said, and I still think so. I am absolutely not afraid of a God who created everything from a bang, so to speak - that is, from nothing. I actually have a model which closely resembles the big bang but keeps the Genesis text pure.
I really need to emphasize this: none of this is new to me…I have been in this for a long, long time and have never wavered an iota on my anti-evolutionary stance. I know how to do this. I need no instruction in science, but thank you for wanting to help.
What are you afraid of? Why not look at all the new data from genomic sequencing from ancient fossils and make you own decision. Nothing in science should make you afraid about your faith - unless it is really weak. Science is neutral on the question of God and God’s role in the universe.
I’ve met a lot of YECs like him that are considering other options. At the same time, they don’t want to make any quick movements. They want to carefully consider all sides of the story, and perhaps explore some new creative options. Behind their reticence is a commitment to personal integrity. They want to be aligned with what we see in nature, but also want to know how to fit in other sources of knowledge, such as Scripture. They are willing to tolerate contradiction and paradox in the midst of that journey. For them to change their mind, if they change their mind, all the pieces have to fall in place, not just one of them.
I respect that position. I think it is a position of integrity. It is a position of confidence, where they can in fact take time to study the evidence. It was my position for a long time too. It was only after I understood things for myself, from all angles, including Scripture and theology, that I changed my mind. That process could not be rushed. I needed non-judgmental places to explore, without being pushed.
Don’t push @r_speir. He has been uncommonly honest by arguing against Lisle. He has also paid a price for that honesty. It deserves our respect. YECs are famously intolerant of dissension. We are lucky to have @r_speir (and @J.E.S) here and unafraid to associate with us. Please treat them with respect and tolerance.
@r_speir, can you tell us your first name? Also what is your background and occupation? Your physics creationist friend, can you invite him here? I would want Peaceful Science to be the sort of place that could be your home, and where you could be treated with respect.
The meaning of 1Cor. 4:6 in its original context would be a great discussion topic for another day. (Here’s a teaser preview: If I accept Euclidean geometry—which isn’t mentioned in the Bible—am I going “beyond what is written?”)
Meanwhile, I can very much respect the path you are taking, @r_speir. I’ve been down a similar road. (I come from a fundamentalist background which some would compare to an IFCA pedigree, although I wouldn’t quite characterize it that way myself.)
Perhaps I just liked the title of this thread, but now that I am in it, am not really keen on where its headed. Thank you for the opportunity. I really feel that YEC’s are in a crisis right now. It is my strong view that they desperately need to change their paradigm. I am all about that. I will check out now and maybe cruise through here later. Thanks again.
What? only two who got the right conclusions on origins? Only two YEC? I don’t know.
are you really YEC and not a trickster? I gotta ask eh!
I wish well to the RATE thing but its not my interest.
YEC does very well and our paradigms9conclusions for regular folk, are excellent since they are Gods word. our figuring out the details is indeed open to correction.
YEC thinkers disagree on loads of stuff.
Be a team player if your YEC. be flexible if that means correction curves in conclusions.
Come to this blog . We need help.
Just catching up on this segment. When i entered this discussion months ago, someone on this site labeled me with “yec” i objected to the label and asked that it be changed because such a label can be so polarizing in an upfront conversation with a person struggling w faith in God that they will turn their ears off. But my objection went unheard so i figured i’d move on with the label and present truths about what i know of things the best i can to an incredibly diverse audience and leave the resulting fruit bearing up to God.
And you are not the first one to express concerns on radiometric dating…Kurt Wise has also stated that there is nothing in our understanding of the natural world to date along with radiometric dating that should cause us to question the validity of its conclusions about the earth being old…billions of yrs old.
Christian scientists have tried to fit science into the theology that they adhere to. And Christians who are quite science minded believe that God did His majority creating via the natural over long ages and develop their theology on the theories most sensible to that science. I believe both err! God is not interested to take the format of a set of theological patterns and ideas we adhere to. He is not just an idea. And God is definately not fond of being defined by our piddly little human scientific understandings either. Instead, God defines Himself as “I AM” When Moses heard from God while in the desert after leaving Egypt, when he asked God how to explain to the Israelites who He was, God said to Moses,“I AM who I AM. Tell them I AM has sent you to them.” God is God. He is really God, the Designer and Creator. And He is a relational God in three Persons, not just a theological idea or a fabrication of our scientific reasoning.
So you are probably thinking, “so whats the point you are trying to make Greg?”
Almost the entire time i have been in discussions here, i have never encouraged or attempted to force my young earth theology on folks. Until recently that i recommended some great resources by k Wise on the fossil record, the issue on the earths age has hardly come up. I have no desire to push anyone into a little theological box labeled with “YEC” Rather i desire to encourage/introduce folks to the very real, self reliant, powerful, all knowing, all sovereign God who says of Himself I AM who I AM who is capable of anything. He is real! I know Him. And i will encourage friends to take some time and drive out and away from the light pollution of our cities and suburbs and look into the night skies at the stars and galaxies, and contemplate the immensity of our universe. Then along with that, i encourage them to then contemplate the idea presented in Scripture as it is agreeable to principles in science that “In the beginning God created,” all of that which one sees in those clear skies such as the stars and planets of our solar system to stars of our galaxy to the stars and galaxies beyond- all created from NOTHING. This thought is absolutely totally and completely incomprehensible to anything our rational scientific minds can be wrapped around. Perhaps as incomprehesible as the idea that creation was recent and our science is inept to determine the age of the universe.
So after taking all of that in and thinking on it a minute, then not only will this God no longer take a form of a little theological box with a sticker on it with the letters “YEC” nor will we be so quick to define Him and His ways by our scientific rationale including the idea that the earth must be old and we must have evolved fr amoebas either. Instead, our science will be much more cautioned and humble. No longer is it a “fact” that the age of the universe is 13.7 billion +/- .03 yrs old. Rather we will suggest that based on our finite understanding of things, the age of the universe seems to be 13 billion yrs old.
And for those who have come to know God who i believe are on the exactly right path to knowing this God who created the universe, who spoke and turned water to wine, created plants and animals and who can take a human body dead and rotting in a cave and give it new life, there is absolutely no excuse for just ingesting hook line and sinker an old earth universal common decent view of our existence as promoted by mainstream. No excuse whatsoever.
I will never try to force one into a yec box. I may challenge an old earth creationist about how fitting his theology is to the remaining Biblical theological picture of God, gospel included, but not try to fit them into the box for the boxes sake. Instead, i will point all, myself included to the God who describes Himself in those Scriptures who sure does not describe Himself as a type incapable of creating all that we have 6000 yrs ago, nor one who should be obligated to provide evidence that is fitting as if we have viewed the creation of other universes as a gauge for comparison to His. And if the language He uses to describe His creation action seem to be more fitting to the view that the universe is actually quite young, since faith in this God comes not from intellectual adherance to science but rather from hearing and hearing from His Word, then i for one will revere that language not because it is a theological box i choose, but because it is the very Words from the One and Only God whom I revere.
I will look forward to hearing more from you r speir. Thanks for your comments.
So your point is that science is useless, since it tells us only lies, and we should all shut up and just go with your interpretation of scripture (though of course you would never force anyone into that box). Is that right?
But it (the “RATE thing”) is YEC actually doing some science!! Why would you have no interest in a modern scientific study that the YEC folks spent a ton of money to perform and from which some actual data was distilled?? Instead you are happy with “land rafts”??
Doesn’t look like he’s “considering other options” to me.
Why would you respect it? It’s textbook closed-mindedness.
When you have entered the “scripture comes first”-mindset, you have become philosophically lost, and you have made it impossible for evidence to change your mind. He seems to be saying, essentially, that the evidence is all irrelevant because if in some way it appears to contradict his interpretation of scripture, then it must be wrong. He’s put the car before the horse, so to speak. Conclusion first, evidence and argument later.