Dear Tim, my understanding is that there was a global flood that covered all the mountains of the planet, in the days of Noah. That global flood lasted for about a year and resulted in the laying down of sedimentary strata all over the planet including Antarctica and under the Earth’s ocean at this present time. It seems to me to be quite plausible that because of the massive geological upheaval and volcanism exposing molten rock to the surface of the crust during the global flood the Earth’s oceans were considerably warmer than they are today, causing greater evaporation and as a consequence greater volumes of precipitation of ice and snow on the planet that would have been shrouded in cloud and consequently reflecting solar radiation from reaching the surface thereby causing a single ice age directly after the flood. I have not seen any convincing evidence for multiple ice ages and I have not heard of any convincing scenarios that would have caused those ice ages to start and stop. similarly, I have not heard of any convincing evidence to validate the existence of Milankovitch cycles,
and from my understanding of the Antarctica and Greenland ice cores it would appear that Milankovitch cycles do not in fact exist… If you a priori assume old age of ice cores then old age conclusions are guaranteed. Much of the ice core strata are sub-annual and cannot honestly be regarded as an annual chronology per layer.
I’m sorry but I do not have the time to go into in depth research of the discrete areas you have listed in the U.S. in your post, but the same principal applies if the worldview through which you view the evidence is ‘deep time’ then it should be of no surprise to anyone that your conclusions and perhaps confirmation bias will result in the reality of ‘deep time’ being proved in your mind. I can view the exact same evidence through the lens of a straightforward reading of the Bible as written and using rigorous science come to a very different conclusion. Thus it is our worldviews that distinguishes interpretations of data.
Like you, I believed in ‘deep time’ of long ages and evolution for many years, there were many things that just didn’t sit right with me or make sense regarding evolution and its necessary corollary ‘deep time’.
I am grateful to the very good people all over the world who despite the attacks from the materialists, the secular academics, and ambivalence from compromising Churches, endeavour to uphold the truth of the Bible from the very first verse.
Dear Terry, that’s fine by me, please checkout every post that I have made, they are only under this topic now, and only go back a couple of days so it won’t be too arduous a task to check.
> James Barr, then Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University, wrote in 1984: > > ‘ … probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: … the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story.’
Not a chance; why would I waste my time reading copy and paste CMI stuff, especially since you can’t or won;t answer my question:
You haven’t added any insight, biblical or otherwise, that makes Jesus more relevant than he was, is, or ever will be. I remain unimpressed by “your creed” and “your other gospel”
Well, benthic foraminiferal d-O18 values are one of the best records of them, and they agree extremely well with both predictions from physics calculations of how the Earth should be moving, and with the independents temperature data from ice cores. And having global d-O18 values stabilize requires time. Having global planktonic foraminiferal stratigraphic ranges requires time for each species to spread across the globe, and then disappear, and then the next species appears, spreads, and disappears. And that spreading takes place almost instantaneously, as far as most geological records are concerned.
Sedimentary layers clearly show “short” up-and-down cycles in sea level on some sort of timescale, based solely on fauna, sediment type, and rock size.
Given that, why would there be identifiable global up-and-down cycles in stable isotope ratios?
People who accept an evolutionary creation also affirm this.
ICR is famous for recycling old material and pretending they are being current. Look at their citations. They are old. They actually have no idea what we believe or what we talk about around here. AIG does the same. They have sub-par journalistic standards.
Yeah, the physics of rapidly-moving tectonic plates yields a situation where the entire crust of the planet would be enough “warmer” that it would turn to plasma.
Which no one does.
In order to “uphold the truth of the Bible from the very first verse” it is necessary to honor the context, including language, literary genre, and worldview. I have yet to encounter a YECist who pays more than lip service to those.
(James Barr quote)
Yeah, as I said, I don’t know what he’s counting as “world class universities”, but my actual Hebrew professors as well as a rabbi I knew in grad school disagreed. For that matter, most of the Old Testament professors disagreed.
Dear Terry, I’m not sure if you are considering the context of the point that Shaun Doyle was making in his article titled: " Do I have to believe in a historical Genesis to be saved?"
My take on the part that you are having a problem with, is that if one’s belief is that "there was no literal Adam and Eve in a literal garden with a literal tree and a literal deceiver, and there wasn’t a literal Fall—then Jesus is literally irrelevant. " simply, because, why did Jesus need to save us, i.e., what did He choose to save us from? The answer is of course from the fall of mankind when Adam and Eve rebelled against God and disobeyed His clear instruction to them both to NOT eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If there was no Adam and Eve, or literal Garden of Eden, or tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or rebellion against God resulting in the fall of all of Adams descendants (us and everyone who has ever lived), then there is no need for Jesus to Save us, He would be irrelevant.
But and will use the word BUT, of course the simple truth of the matter is that “there was a literal Adam and Eve in a literal garden with a literal tree and a literal deceiver, and there was a literal Fall—and therefore Jesus is absolutely literally relevant!
You can call it what you will, but to me that makes perfect sense.
Remember that in the same article by Shaun Doyle, he stated, " Simply put, believing Genesis is history, by the Bible’s standards, isn’t necessary to be a genuine Christian.”
Thus it is not a salvation issue, but not believing Genesis to be historical narrative,when God has gone to great lengths to make certain that it can be interpreted in no other way:
The Creation
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 And the earth was a [a]formless and desolate emptiness, and darkness was over the [b]surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the [c]surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “[d]Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness He called “night.” And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 Then God said, “Let there be [e]an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 God made the [f]expanse, and separated the waters that were below the [g]expanse from the waters that were above the [h]expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the [i]expanse “heaven.” And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land “earth,” and the gathering of the waters He called “seas”; and God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout [j]vegetation, [k]plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit according to [l]their kind [m]with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth produced [n]vegetation, [o]plants yielding seed according to [p]their kind, and trees bearing fruit [q]with seed in them, according to [r]their kind; and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
14 Then God said, “Let there be [s]lights in the [t]expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and they shall [u]serve as signs and for seasons, and for days and years; 15 and they [v]shall serve as lights in the [w]expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 God made the two great lights, the greater light [x]to govern the day, and the lesser light [y]to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the [z]expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and [aa]to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
20 Then God said, “Let the waters [ab]teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth [ac]in the open [ad]expanse of the heavens.” 21 And God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24 Then God said, “Let the earth produce living creatures according to [ae]their kind: livestock and crawling things and animals of the earth according to [af]their kind”; and it was so. 25 God made the animals of the earth according to [ag]their kind, and the livestock according to [ah]their kind, and everything that crawls on the ground according to its kind; and God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, “[ai]Let Us make mankind in Our image, according to Our likeness; and [aj]let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all the earth, and over every crawling thing that crawls on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that [ak]moves on the earth.” 29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the [al]surface of all the earth, and every tree [am]which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every animal of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to everything that [an]moves on the earth [ao]which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so. 31 And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
You missed his point: the article is saying that people can be genuine Christians while making Jesus irrelevant.
BTW, since you decided to toss in that block of text, please tell us what ancient near eastern literary genre it was written in and the lesson that the account conveys by using that literary genre. Additionally, describe briefly the polemical purpose of the account and how we know that it has a polemical purpose.
Four times hotter than the surface of the sun. Four times hotter than the highest known boiling point of any chemical element.
And that’s just from accelerated nuclear decay alone. Catastrophic plate tectonics, and all the other accelerated processes on top of it, would bump the temperature up even higher.
And no, this wasn’t some kind of “secularist rescuing device.” It wasn’t some sort of attack to “discredit creationism.” It was the young earthists’ own admission.
Don’t believe me? Here’s a link to the place in the RATE project technical report where they do the calculations:
People who accept an evolutionary creation also affirm this.<
Dear Christy, thanks for your post.
Regarding: “People who accept an evolutionary creation also affirm this.”
Yes, I absolutely agree and that is why we are ALL part of the one body of Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,whether we believe in the literal historical narrative as written in Genesis or we believe that evolution is how the diversity of life and we came to be here.
Regarding: “ICR is famous for recycling old material and pretending they are being current. Look at their citations. They are old. They actually have no idea what we believe or what we talk about around here. AIG does the same. They have sub-par journalistic standards.”
I must admit that I don’t know a great deal about ICR or AIG except that from what publications and media I have seen from those organisations I am convinced they’re comprised of honest conscientious Bible believing Christian people who are working hard to bring the lost to our Lord and Saviour with gentleness and respect.
this is in reference to the effect of magma coming into contact with the seabed and ocean water resulting in higher evaporation rates, that as I described in my post is the only mechanism that makes sense regarding a cause for the one ice age directly after the flood, which may have lasted for several hundred years until the oceans eventually cooled down.
I have met Andrew Snelling and corresponded with John Baumgardner and can testify that they are honest dedicated scientists who are seeking to understand the mechanisms God employed in His creation. They do not state anywhere that they have all the answers and there are certainly unresolved questions that still need to be solved. The heat produced from accelerated nuclear decay is certainly a problem yet to be solved.
What on earth are you talking about?? The 22,400°C was their own admission about what accelerated nuclear decay would do.
I think you may want to take a look at this:
Oh come on. The heat problem for accelerated nuclear decay is a deal breaker. It doesn’t take a “secularist” or a “materialist” worldview to see this, and it’s not a case of different worldviews giving different interpretations. Accelerated nuclear decay is a claim that is so bad that I’ve even had young earthists tell me they thought it was some sort of parody to “discredit creationism.”
You might be interested to read some of the threads on this Forum by @gbob Glenn Morton. He passed away in 2020, but he was a geologist who worked with many of these YEC guys at one point in his career and could point out all sorts of places where they have been debunked and know it, which makes you wonder why they keep lying about stuff.
Mount St. Helens aligns just fine with conventional geology, it’s nothing but a YEC squirrel. There are no sequence stratification there indicating alternating sea levels, metamorphosis, identity with formations separated by tectonic movement, or progression of index fossils including microfossils. A big pile of ash is what we expect, and that is what we get - nothing to do with the stratification which demonstrates epochs of geological age. Volcanic eruptions are very useful, however, for dating of sedimentary layers, correlating extinctions, and study of tectonic movement and erosion over hot spots, all of which indicate the passage of deep geological time.
Right where we expect them. A transitional fossil possesses characteristics of both groups, which benefited the animal at the time. Every time a new one comes to light, YEC responds with “that is just a fish, that is just a bird, that is just an ape, that is just a whale, that is just a weird creature.” Every year, more fossils are found, and there really is not much to speak of in terms of yawning gaps.
Others, including thousands of scientists performing these analysis, seem to know enough about radiometric dating to consider it a sound procedure that is solidly based on theoretical and empirical science and outputs reliable results regardless of worldview.
You may know how to run equipment well, but you rather belie yourself with respect to understanding how science works.
Science is like plumbing – there’s no such thing as ‘secular plumbing’ nor is there any such thing as ‘secular science’. The latter is something that doctrinaire YECs pretend and believe exists. Christians as well as unbelievers may conflate philosophical naturalism and methodological naturalism, the latter being science, but devoted and honest believers can stand side by side with unbelievers and do the same science.
I wonder if you’ve seen this – it’s a very cool account of Christians and unbelievers doing good science together (at remote distances) [and getting the science wrong]:
Wait a second! It just hit me! What you and Shaun Doyle are saying is that,
Although the Bible doesn’t say that a person has to believe in a historical Genesis in order to be a genuine Christian, failure to believe the six articles of your creed, i.e. a literal Adam, a literal Eve, a literal garden, a literal tree, a literal deceiver, and a literal Fall "makes Jesus irrelevant."
LOL! Now that IS different than saying:
By your standards, and Shaun’s and Young Earth Creationists’ standards, failure to believe the six articles of YEC’s Creed“makes Jesus irrelevant.”
Dear Terry, I certainly do not take you for a fool under any circumstances. I actually was not aware that Shaun Doyle is an Australian and I fail to see how that is relevant.
You are correct that we do have irreconcilable differences. I thought that I had explained your query, i.e., in my post 122
If there was no fall, then we (humanity that is) would be in our original state, i.e., sinless, blameless and innocent before God. There would be no need for Jesus to give of Himself unto death to pay the price incurred by His own Holy character. In the sense of the crucifixion and only in the sense of the crucifixion, there would be no need for that to have taken place if we did not fall. But unfortunately, we (right back to Adam) did fall.
Regards,
jon
I had a revelation, and have rewritten the post to which you just responded. In light of my revelation, I must point out, if I am understanding you (and all of YEC-dom) correctly, you have put yourself above the Bible and all of the authors in it. That is unacceptable nonsense.
According to Paul, writing in 1 Corinthians 1:23 “But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness”. You have added to and perverted the Gospel.
