The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

DMcFadden · #11 (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davidius

Here are some links to articles on a website my friend, who buys into the day-age hypothesis, likes:

Does Genesis One Conflict with Science? Day-Age Interpretation

Biblical Evidence for Long Creation Days

If you go here: Biblical Creation and scroll down to "Young Earth Creationism" you will see that he attempts to show that young-earth creationism is not merely "unscientific," but also unscriptural. Included among these articles is his theory that death did indeed exist before the Fall: No Death Before the Fall - A Young Earth Problem

David,

Your citations were excellent! Reading through some of the arguments reminds me that scientifically educated people can make a strong case for and old earth just as some of the yec scientists do on the other side. My contention is not that I have scientific sophistication to albitrate between the two. Rather, I buy the idea that the facts are susceptible to diverse interpretations, based upon one's worldview.

Yes, I know that many committed Christians defend an old earth, and evolution for that matter. The head of the human genome project, Dr. Collins had a bestseller rejecting YEC and ID. Not only that, but it got him an interview on Schuller's Hour of Power and lots of positive press in the evangelical community. His version of theistic evolution, BioLogos, even contains the idea that once evolution got under way no special supernatural intervention was required!!!

However, I believe that a more consistent Christian position reads the Bible in its natural sense, even when dealing with narrative portions of Genesis 1-11. Is it a slam-dunk? Of course not. Can it be defended intellectually? Absolutely!

BTW, the cavalier dismissal of Answers in Genesis scientists and firm statements of what is "true" and "not true" amuses me. Confident dismissals of the YEC position, for example, based upon hypothetical "dark matter" hardly convince me.