Did Jesus Christ, our Lord, during His physical ministry on Earth, in his truly mortal body, believe in Young Earth Creationism?

Right. No desire in heaven, indeed. I’m pretty sure there will be a desire for music – I listened to Palestrina’s Missa Papae Marcelli last night. (If you want to follow the music, here’s a good source.)


What, we have to be capable of hurting someone to be in heaven? This is why heaven is so unimaginable. What is infinite transcendent creation doing right now? What has it been doing from eternity? We will always be learning. Always be creating. Alone and together. In glorified human form. It takes ten thousand hours to become good at anything. We’ll become good at everything. With everyone. Whatever the sublime is doing, it has nothing to do with us. Is there a glorified earth where what will be the trillion of humanity are resurrecting? I’d need to walk all of it. Climb every mountain. And a glorified galaxy to somehow actually explore? I think we’ll need a century or ten to deconstruct and reconstruct ourselves. For a start. We haven’t the faintest idea have we? But nobody abuses power, it’s impossible. But… Will we stub our toes? Sleep? Will there be toilets? Will there be falling in love? And sex? Those are a tad… mammalian. Disordered. Unrequited. Tragic. Finite. There will be friendship. All that suffers has been transcending for hundreds of millions of years. Humans for hundreds of thousands in our Terran-local patch of infinite heaven. Boredom is a kind of suffering. Not possible. Meaningless.

1 Like

It’s beautiful. Our choir of men and boys sing it occasionally at our choral Eucharists.

1 Like

Because He is divine.

The state of the universe and the creation is not trivial.

It is in the Midrash:

So, the YEC is not a recent notion but a continuous literal interpretation on the Bible (OT and NT) from even before Jesus’ time that continues today.

The term itself is relatively new but the ideas are classical.

I actually wish this Forum is open for Young Earth Creationists so we can have open discussions that are respectful towards each other.

We need to show our Young Earth Creationists brothers and sisters why we believe in the scientific rigor of the Evolution Theory.

Also, to some extent: all the lies and manipulation made by many websites like Answers in Genesis and authors like Dr Duane Gish and Dr James Mitchell Tour.

1 Like

I believe we who truly believe in Christ will receive the fruit of life.

I don’t know and don’t think it matters. Did he understand physics or chemistry or calculus? No.
Does it matter? No.
Does this in any way challenge the proposition of the human and divine aspects of his nature? No.
I believe he operated within a time and a culture, within human limitations, yet where his mission warranted also touched into divine insight. He was emphatic about this point: he spoke what he heard from his father.
Therefore it’s interesting what he affirms, what he ignores and what he says in general terms about Genesis in a way that could be read either way - either myth that holds truth or literal. The modern age hasn’t really caught him out.

1 Like

He was divine in nature. The state of hermeneutics 1800 years after His human life is hardly that of the universal creation.

If you have to believe that the meta-infinite, meta-eternal, perichoretic, inseparable Second Person of the Holy and Undivided Triune Godhead collapsed to a Spirit spermatozoan once for the only inhabited world of a trillion trillion dead worlds in our nonetheless lone aging universe, and kept all His meaningless, impossible omnis, and that the future has already happened, then sure.

1 Like

The core, key, identifying, essential, fundamental reactionary idea denying science, empiricism, rationality, reality is only 200 years old. It’s not an idea that Jesus had, or any Abrahamic had until then.

1 Like

Actually, the universe was created Last Thursday (Last Thursdayism). And mankind was created to serve cats.


The belief that there was not historical evidence for more than a few thousand years was widely held in Jewish and Christian circles from early times. But that belief was often associated with highly figurative views of Genesis 1. As evidence of longer history emerged in the later 1600’s into the 1700’s, few saw any problem with filling in time that had been skipped over in Genesis; prehuman geological history was evidently theologically unimportant and so not mentioned. The modern YEC movement claims that Genesis 1 should be read as modern science, and is not the same as historical views, just as Hindu ideas of reincarnation for large amounts of time or the idea popular among “Enlightenment” deists of earth with humans continuing through innumerable cycles are not the same as the modern geologic concept of earth’s age.

The “prooftexts” supposed to show that Jesus accepted a young earth are pretty bad. The comparison of the second coming to Noah’s flood is claimed to prove that the flood was global, but Luke also includes a comparison to the destruction of Sodom - the point is suddenness, with nothing indicated about the geography. II Peter refers to the “world of the ungodly” being destroyed by the flood, but that “world” is cosmos. The whole universe definitely was not flooded. Cosmos can even mean merely “stuff”, but the most common use is “world” in the negative spiritual sense of humanity aligned against God. That doesn’t give geography, either. Likewise, reference to the way marriage was “from the beginning” is no proof that Jesus is claiming that human marriage dates from shortly after the creation of the earth.

I doubt that He would have thought the question very sensible, if someone had asked Him - “Why are you worrying about that? Come, follow Me.” {Not that geological research is pointless, but that He wouldn’t be into arguing about it.)


But Jesus, His disciples, and the Apostles seemed to take the Book of Genesis literally.

When Christ referred to “in the beginning” what He meant was “as it is written in the Book of Beginning / Bereshit.” A 6-day creation is the common understanding among Jews at that time, there is no evidence so far that would prove an alternative worldview than the literal 6-day creation which is the central tenet of the Young Earth Creationism.

“Faith” has a wide range of connotations, or meanings.

Using the word as if faith that there will be a road to drive on,
or thst the theory of evolution is soundly based is not at all like the
faith that God actually exists and in the forms one believes.

Equivocation is a pretty straightforward concept.

I saw one example from the second century, presumably 100 plus years after Jesus had died. Yes it may indicate a school of thought but let’s not overexaggerate. You also linked the wiki article to Midrash. What definition of midrash speciifically are you referring to that is contemporaneous with Jesus? The works from 400-1200 CE? If so, you have a odd definition of what it means for someone to be a contemporary of Jesus.

One source from the 2d century that logically, is not necessarily indicative of what the majority of Jews believed on issues at the time, let alone a century earlier. What else do you got leading to your confident belief that Jesus was a YEC despite him never addressing the issue?



I can argue love is mammalian. Everything we do is mammalian by definition. I see contradictions in your depiction of heaven but I expect them from us all because as you said, “We haven’t the faintest idea have we?”


1 Like

Birds and Reptiles show love.

Doves show monogamous love.

Affection is universal.

We would have to define love as opposed to affection before continuing this train of thought.

1 Like

The Midrash came from around 400 AD but there were precursors and older ‘Midrash’ like Zugot and Tannaim that were indeed Jesus’ contemporaries.


That source is closer to the Jewish Consensus in 1st century AD than Principia or a Brief History of Time or the Copenhagen Interpretation to describe what the Jewish Consensus in 1st century AD would have been.

I am sure that in Rabbinic Literature during Christ’ time Zugot and Tannaim there must be specific references that indicate the belief in literal 6-day creation.

Oh aye Vinnie. Human mammals take love beyond all other organisms owing to our uniquely having intentionality. Affection, unguarded intimacy, grooming is a huge part of love. I scratched a linden moth’s back and it stayed. It ‘liked’ it. It was quite ‘happy’. I look forward to sharing all my family pets in the hereafter. Will they have glorified fleas and glorified nematodes? Can you imagine the murmurations of a trillion glorified starlings? The paradoxes of glorification and the continuation of consciousness, of being, challenge the whole idea of heaven. I’d want my own pack of course and there will be plenty to go round. In my heaven anyway. But what will it all run on? The fuel? The thermodynamics?

1 Like

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.