SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : General Topics : Age of the Earth and Creation vs. Evolution

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 )

Joined: 2003/11/30
Posts: 78


rhpmike wrote:

"100% agree with Cja There is definite evidence for a young earth but for some reason we like to listen to about 55% of scientist who believe in evoluiton rather than the bible."

Sorry, I don't follow. Do you mean that only 55% of scientists believe in evolution??? If so, where did you get that number from?

Rikard Eriksson

 2004/7/3 18:27Profile

Joined: 2004/7/3
Posts: 5


I recently saw a survey that surveyed science profs and scientists and asked if they believed in evolution. Most of the space and micro-biologists did not believe in evolution because they see the world oro human structure is just too complicated to be from evolution. They also realize that certain things are interdependent. In other words while species1 might not need a certain organ but species2 would need it. So while species2 was evolving iit would die off before it had millions of years to evolve. I dont remember the percentages of the poll exactly but just more than 50% did beleive in it.

Also, dinosaurs did live before the flood and also after the flood. However, as well as animals now live shorter life sppans so the animals would not be as big. So dinosaurs are smaller and i already pointed out how we classify dragons and dinos as two different things when in reality they could be the same.
The earth is not millions of years old. The scientists just make up that lie so that they can supposedly support evolution. In fairy tales we learn that frog + kiss = human. Evolution teaches us that frog + time = human. This is pure nonsense that they teach in schools.

 2004/7/3 18:43Profile

Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia

 Re: Dinosaurs, Evolution and Young Earth

Job 40:15-24 KJV Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. [16] Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. [17] He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. [18] His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. [19] He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. [20] Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. [21] He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. [22] The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. [23] Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. [24] He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.
Many scholars believe the Leviathon and Behemoth, in the book of Job, refer to certain dinosaurs. I can't remember what they believe Leviathon was, but apparently Behemoth's description is remarkably similar to that of a brontosaurus. In some translations try to translate "behemoth" (which is the actual hebrew word) as "hipopotamus" (I believe that the Living Bible uses this...but don't quote me:-)). However, hippos don't have a "tail like a cedar". (for more info check out Dinosaurs and the Bible by Gary Parker)
The big problem with evolution, from a scriptural view point, is that if God used this means, then the earth was not "very good" when He finished, because it had to rely on a meathod of "creation", that depends on death to work (after all, that is what natural selection and evolution depend on to work-one thing dies, something better pops up in its place). Scripture describes a "very good" creation, which is gradually eroding as a direct result of sin. Evolution explains a "chaotic" world that is gradually getting better. Ie. God begins with life, evoultion begins with death.
In regard to young earth theory, I once heard a preacher say that "Yeah, God could have made the earth in "millions of years", but it takes faith to believe that when He said, in Genesis, 'six days' he meant it." (paraphrase) The true danger is in believing anything other than 6 days is that if we allow this passage to be "open to interpretaion", we leave the whole Bible open to scrutiny. After all, "God is not a man that He would lie, nor a son of man that He must repent". If we allow ourselves the right to change biblical accounts, we better have a very solid reason why, or it ceases to be the "final authority".
This does not mean that we are to accept any teaching that pops up, because it seems "biblical", but to weigh it all against scripture. There is nothing to weigh scripture against. It is the "straight stick" by which all other sticks are to be compared.
Consider this, once upon a time, divorce was almost unheard of. Now it seems that marriage is looked at as fluid. Abortion was ghastly, now when someone even miscarries the victims are given an "oh well, better luck next time" response. And don't get me started on the whole "gay ordination" debate.
We need to understand that all the ppl who believe the above, have very well reasoned arguments to justify themselves (even the "gay ordination" arguments sound scriptural). Creation is the foundation for all our faith, after all, if we question creation, we question God's right to rulership. If we question His meathods, then we can question the whole fact.
At the end of the day, to think anything else is unnecessary, because the scientific evidence to support "young earth theory" makes all other theories sound ridiculous. (refer to The Exciting Testimony of a Former Atheist/Evolutionist)
Note: Audio files are linked from the Answers in Genesis website, and are in Real Media (.rm) format.

Aaron Ireland

 2004/7/4 1:33Profile

Joined: 2004/7/3
Posts: 5


Wow. I already like this site. It definitely seems that CJaKfOrEsT is right on. I have not heard one thing in this thread that i disagree with. He is right on the account that that word should not be translated Hippo. Hippos have little tales.

 2004/7/4 3:50Profile

Joined: 2004/5/8
Posts: 62


According to the scientific method, neither view points can currently be proven. It takes faith-religion to make that leap of choosing a view point. So its ironic that a faith based system/religion is being taught in public schools often as a factual theory. Oh well, we are a religious nation of atheists. Remember, atheism is a religion according to the supreme courts!

Interestingly enough, many theories regarding evolution and an old earth/unvirse can be scientifically ruled out.

I really suggest watching the free videos on the site. I've ordered his lecture series, and a few of his video taped debates. Can't wait to find the time to watch them.

Oh as for carbon-14 dating, interestingly enough... I remember watching a documentary years ago on the Discovery Chanel some years back. If somethings under water with lots of minerals a mere month can make it fossilize and appear millions of years old to carbon dating. They faked alot of fossils, and fooled researchers at major universities. Was really an interesting documentary... not sure how accurate it was, but I couldn't help but think of hey.. if their was a world wide flood, wouldn't it have washed up much of the earths soil/minerals... something to think about.


 2004/7/4 9:55Profile

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy