Your question has gotten asked here, repeatedly, for years. YEC has no answer.
In fact they don’t dare answer because to do so would force them to admit that they are working from an idea that comes from scientific materialism early in the twentieth century, not from anyhwere in the Bible.
Jon,
Please stop using “Bible believing Christian” as a synonym for “young earthist.” Old earth creationists and evolutionary creationists are Bible believing Christians too, and suggesting otherwise is against the rules of this forum which state this:
- Assume legitimate Christian faith on the part of other people, unless they identify otherwise. The purpose of discussions here is not to judge the legitimacy or efficacy of anyone’s faith or lack of faith.
No Jon, time dilation would not be a valid effect from a location in space close to the mass geometric centre of a finite extent universe with a gravity field that is uniform, stable and constant. I’ve already pointed out to you, time dilation does not work that way.
Thanks for the link, Jon. Perhaps you should read it too. If you do, you’ll find that Conner and Page’s final paragraph says this:
(Emphasis mine.)
It appears to me that this is a refutation of Russell Humphreys’ gravitational well nonsense by other young earthists. Need I say more?
Hi James, thanks for your comment.
But you appear to utterly misunderstand where I am coming from as a fellow Christian and brother in Jesus our Loving Lord and Saviour.
I will not stop using ‘Bible believing Christian’ as that is an accurate description.
I sense that the acronym being used on this site “YEC” (as a synonym for Bible believing Christian’s such as myself), is to some extent used in a derogatory manner, is simplistic and only serves to engender a them and us mentality, which does no good for anyone.
But it is not valid to interpret that I judge anyone else about their standing with God.
I trust the Word of our Lord and know that to do so is in error:
Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Matthew 7:1-5
Thus be assured that I do not judge you or anyone else, for there but by the grace of God go I.
God Bless,
jon
Thanks for the link Terry.
To me, it’s very predictable that Morris answer will be like in the quote above (making a supernatural event based on his current knowledge) while he definitely know that reading the verse literally he should’ve believed what God’s Word say.
God say: Sun, stop !
Morris say: No… You don’t say Sun, stop!, but Earth, stop!
Me: 
slowed it down again until it stopped
Joshua’s Long Day BY HENRY M. MORRIS, PH.D. |
again ??
Me: Morris answer will be like in the quote above (making a supernatural event based on his current knowledge)
Yet, until now I still can’t find YEC’s article which cover Genesis 1:1-5 involving the “current knowledge” that day&night happen simultaneously on earth.
Thanks for clearing that up, Jon. I think I understand where you’re coming from. Finding the right terminology can be tricky because it’s easy to be misunderstood.
However, you do need to be careful. If you are using “Bible believing Christian” when the context clearly indicates that you mean those who believe that the Earth is only six thousand years old, then that comes across as implying that you do not consider OECs and ECs to be Bible believing Christians, whether that is your intention or not. Furthermore, when you are repeatedly attributing deep geological time to atheistic or materialistic philosophy, despite having had it pointed out to you repeatedly that such an attribution is categorically false, then you are just reinforcing that perception.
So sorry, but it is not accurate.
But what you don’t appear to appreciate is that I identify as a Bible believing Christian.
I am not a follower of Judaism or Buddhism or Islam or Hindu or Bahai or Shinto, but I am a follower of Jesus Christ and I believe the Word that we have in the Scriptures that teaches us how we should live.
I believe many things, from the Holy Bible. I believe that Jesus Spoke And Calmed The Storm And The Sea but I don’t identify as a JSACTSATS, I believe that the Judgement of God on humanities evil and the abominations people were committing means that there was a Global Flood That Destroyed All Life On Earth that had the breath of life in their nostrils, but I don’t identify as a GFTDALOE, I believe that Jesus Rose From The Dead, but I don’t identify as a JRFTD, I believe that the Creation Was Made In Six Ordinary Days, but I don’t identify as a CWMISOD, first and foremost I am a believer in the Saving Grace of Jesus towards me, such as, that Jesus died on the Cross and paid the price His pure Justice and Righteousness demanded for the sins of humanity including me, I am a Bible Believing Christian, not an acronym, so why is it that you wish to impose YEC on me?
Would you like it if I referred to you and the people who hold to similar beliefs to you as an OEBE, Old Earth Believing Evolutionist, or something equally as inane, if in fact you actually identify as a Christian, I am sure you would rather be identified as such, i.e., as a Christian.
Wouldn’t treating one another with a modecum of decency and respect be a better witness to those who don’t believe in Jesus and be a far better witness that edifies all, rather than the incessant confrontational attack mode that seems to follow every post that doesn’t precisely agree with what you believe.
I myself am also at fault in this regard and apologise if I have caused any offence, by calling a spade a spade for matters that I believe are real.
But there are things that I don’t believe are correct in a range of Christian denominations, but I don’t create an acronym for those people and then use it disparagingly as a derogatory slur on their intelligence. To me they are Christians first and foremost, brothers and sisters in the Lord, and I am sure that is how most see themselves too!
Jesus clearly warned us all:
*1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
*2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
*3 Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
*4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?
*5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." Matthew 7:1-5
God Bless,
jon
It is not derogatory to name a doctrine according to its content. Surely, you are a Bible believing Christian. But people of your conviction are not the only Bible-believing Christians - there are a lot of Christians who believe that Bible is the word of God; moreover, there are some non-Christians who share this belief. So, to say that somebody considers the Bible the word of God is not very informative - it would not even reveal whether this person is Christian or not (here I have in mind quite a mainstream definition - to be at least a formal Christian, one should belong to a religious community that subscribes to the Nicene Creed or adheres to all the doctrines of this Creed without subscribing to the text itself).
To characterize a community or a school of thought, one should outline its distinctive trait. What is the distinctive trait of the people of your conviction? A doctrine that the Bible contains a teaching about the age of the Earth; and that the age of the Earth (or of the whole Universe) according to the Bible is approximately 6000 years. It’s perfectly appropriate to call this belief “the Young Earth Doctrine”. That’s just a neutral description of how you read the Bible; whereas the other Bible believing Christians don’t read the Bible the same way you do and, therefore, don’t arrive at your conclusion about the young Earth.
Hi Nicholas, thanks for your thoughts.
Of course, and I have never, ever said otherwise, yet it appears I have hit a raw nerve simply by identifying as a Bible Believing Christian; it appears this matter is quite sensitive for some.
By calling myself a Bible Believing Christian, ‘ipso facto’ does not in any way mean all other people are excluded except people who have similar beliefs to me.
I have no problem with anyone who calls themselves a Bible believing Christian or just simply a Christian, as they are the same. A Christian believes the Bible, the Bible is mainly about Jesus as the Creator and a significant thread running throughout the Old Testament and Incarnate in Person on Earth in the New Testament.
God Bless,
jon
Maybe it’s because according to you: a Bible Believing Christian MUST read the Bible literally, Jon.
So… the detail sentence from you is:
If you claim to be a Bible believing Christian, I do not understand why you do not believe the Bible MUST be read literally.
Please cmiiw.
We are really talking about interpretations. @Burrawang cannot understand why any “Bible Believing Christian” would not accept his (or his group) human, fallible interpretation. He doesn’t come out and say it directly, but his posts hint that his position is if you don’t accept his human, fallible interpretation then you are somehow “less”.
All sorts of different continuums could be made - ones that don’t look like some sort of ‘stairway’ where TE is the last step before atheism. One could also make a continuum for how seriously people take sacred scriptures - and on that continuum, it’s quite possible that YECism would be below TEism. Or one could order it according to ‘fundamentalism’ - which would cross through both religious and irreligious groups.
As it is though, one could take the existing scale above and also show it like this …
But what you don’t appear to appreciate is that I’m not claiming that you aren’t. No-one has a problem with you identifying as a Bible believing Christian, Jon, and it is quite disingenuous to claim otherwise.
The problem is that you are using the phrase “Bible believing Christian” in a way that denies that old earth creationists and evolutionary creationists are Bible believing Christians.
I know that you will deny doing so, and acknowledge that OECs and ECs are Christians when asked to spell it out explicitly, but when you describe searching for evidence of a young earth as an activity that is characteristic of being a Bible believing Christian in a post where you also attribute deep geological time to atheistic and materialistic philosophy, I’m sorry but that is denying that OECs and ECs are Bible believing Christians.
This is called “speaking out of both sides of your mouth,” Jon. It’s something I’ve seen other young earth zealots do. They try to get as close as they can possibly get away with to flat-out denying that OECs and ECs are Christians while not stating it explicitly, then when asked to spell out explicitly where they stand on the matter, they will say that yes, we are Christians after all, and probably even strenuously deny having ever suggested otherwise. I’m sorry to have to be blunt here, but it’s dishonest.
A term can be basically descriptive and neutral, but still accumulate negative associations. All such labels tend to be simplistic and disregarding of the nuances within memberships, but are unfortunately necessary to keep discussion concise enough to be readable. I much dislike the term “theistic evolutionist”, but it is appropriate enough to lump me in there.
The designation YEC focuses on the position held most distinctly, that of holding to a young earth created ex nihilo, and is a common self reference within that community, so I think the acronym in itself just represents a strait forward grouping of ideas. Although the term itself may be neutral, however, that does not imply that there exists a balance of credibility. YEC stridently advocate beliefs which are contrary to pervasive evidence, and in so doing invite a broader label which actually is pejorative - that of pseudoscience.
So you prefer lies.
Star formation was explained long before anyone had a clue about dark matter; it was even explained before Einstein – Newtonian gravity is sufficient to explain star formation.
Nope – there are galaxies that show no evidence of dark matter, and Newton’s rules of gravity are sufficient to explain them.
It has nothing to do with the Big Bang, it has to do with observational science.
When did God step aside and let you be in charge of the universe?
Your yelling doesn’t change what is observed by all honest observers.
I’m not convinced he grasps what a scientific model is in the first place given the ongoing incoherence in his claims. It would be nice if he could demonstrate othersie.
That is mega-kool!
An enigmatic apparition from some future unknown time!?
Brothers and sisters in Christ.
We all take our lumps I guess - but can always be in corrective mode if we have the energy. We all get to self-identify however we want, but it still has to be within reason, of course. I can call myself a Rhodes Scholar all day if I want to but it wouldn’t actually make me one. It would make me a liar, though. YECists may bang on this very drum about others who also self-identify as Bible-believing Christians. But what you will rarely, if ever hear young earth believers acknowledge is that it is their forced understanding of scriptures that is being rejected, not scriptures themselves. In all fairness, any Christians will probably want to stake a claim of at least some confidence about various areas of scriptures that we feel we basically understand well enough. But we should also keep the humility close at hand of recognizing our obligation to subject our own views to challenge - scriptural and otherwise.
*LOL! I’ve been known to telll my brothers by adoption “Don’t be an idiot! You’re woefully wrong or uninformed.”
Perhaps the most Bible-believing Christian I’ve ever known was my first Hebrew professor, who insisted that unless an idea was based on the text it wasn’t theology. YECers employ a number of ideas that aren’t based on the text, and not only still claim they are doing theology but refuse to acknowledge that they are doing what they are actually doing. He pointed out that as with all human literature, the meaning that counted was the meaning in the mind of the writer, which could only be known via understanding the writer’s historical, cultural, worldview, and literary context.
He was also one of those who never called a translation “the Bible”, it was always “a translation”. In class if he said “Get out your Bibles” he meant the Hebrew, otherwise he would say “Get out your translations”, or would specify a specific translation – and getting out our translation was invariably for the purpose of seeing how different translators handled tricky bits of Hebrew. For that matter we did similar comparisons with translations of other ancient near eastern languages all for learning how the business of translation was done.
Fun anecdote: We were once given a Hebrew text (not from the Tanakh) and were told to translate it into Greek. We each passed our work on that to our neighbor in the classroom, for the task of turning the Greek into Latin. Those Latin translations were then passed on with instructions to translate to Hebrew. Finally those were passed on and we compared the resultant Hebrew with the original text.
= - = + = - = † = - = + = - =
For YECers? No, it isn’t – YECers by their very methods show they do not believe the Bible itself, they believe a translated text interpreted with a modern worldview. Whether they think they are believing the Bible is not relevant, it only shows they are not aware of their own worldview.
This is not, BTW, “judging” in the sense of the quote from Matthew, which uses the Greek word κρίνω (KREE-no), it is in the sense that Paul uses when he employs the verb ἀνακρίνω (a-na-KREE-no) – the first indicates passing sentence, the second indicates investigating and analyzing.
= - = + = - = † = - = + = - =
Good observation!
= - = + = - = † = - = + = - =
Especially since it has been pointed out a number of times that honest Hebrew scholars found deep time in Genesis 1 back before there were telescopes, before there was any materialistic philosophy and when atheists, if there were any, kept their mouths shut.
Because that is what you plainly believe.
Exactly.
And use of the adjectival phrase strongly suggests that the one employing it considers that there are Christians who don’t believe the Bible; indeed the specific use in this forum also suggests that the one employing it considers that at least some here do not qualify for the category described with the phrase.
“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.
