Old Earth versus Young Earth...is it a matter of orthodoxy?

[T-Bone]

How much difference does it make concerning one's view of the age of the earth?  Does literal interpretation of the Scripture require a young earth view?  Does one's view of this matter rise to the level of heresy?

What do you all think?

 

[Ransom]

Well, if you're going to identify with the "old-time religion" of the early Fundamentalists, then you're going to have to accept old-earth creationists as brethren, because until the 1930s, that's what most of them were.

 

[T-Bone]

Well, if you're going to identify with the "old-time religion" of the early Fundamentalists, then you're going to have to accept old-earth creationists as brethren, because until the 1930s, that's what most of them were.

Interesting...wondering how the majority view in fundamentalist has seemed to change.  I am interested in whether people here think it really makes a difference...or if both views, in most people's minds, fit within the pale of orthodoxy.

 

[CrAyCrAyJaY]

I believe the earth is as old as the scientific community says it is, although I believe that man has been around at least 7-15,000 years, that's just my own opinion.

 

[subllibrm]

Well, if you're going to identify with the "old-time religion" of the early Fundamentalists, then you're going to have to accept old-earth creationists as brethren, because until the 1930s, that's what most of them were.

Tis true. Any good man of God who cut his teeth on the blessed marginal notes of Schofield has no choice but to be an ardent gapper.

 

[FSSL]

A matter of orthodoxy, no.
The ability to have a cohesive view of original sin and death, yes.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

A matter of orthodoxy, no.
The ability to have a cohesive view of original sin and death, yes.

^This is the important issue.

How old is the earth?  I have no idea.  But I don't trust the "scientific" methodologies used to determine the age of the earth, so I think it's still an open question. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

i think i wrote something once about my beliefs on that in this forum a couple years ago..... .... i believe that pre-flood most all of the water that now makes up the ocean was below the ground.... under the earths crust.... ... and another large amount of water was in the upper atmosphere protecting the earth from radiation from space ........... the bible says when the flood happend the windows of heaven were opened and the fountains of the deep broken up..... so the water came onto the earths surface from 2 different places............. after the flood the earths crust settled and the water settled with it... into what we now know as the oceans.........

i agree the continents separated at that time too.... closer to where they are today......but i think they still could have been separated by something of a smaller sea or lakes before the flood......  and if not then something about the terrain kept people from venturing into places God was not ready for them to go.......

it;s all just a personal theory......... one that the billion year earth theorists like to laugh at........ but i really belive it could be possible........ and it doesn;t contradict the biblical account of things either........

Yeah, I also think most of the water was underground pre-flood, and the atmosphere was entirely different then, possibly containing waters above, filtering out the harmful cosmic rays.  That would explain a lot of things, like why people lived so much longer, but how people lived shorter and shorter after the flood as the new environment moved toward something of today's equilibrium. 

It would also explain why things that can be carbon dated (not all things can) seem to be dated much older than I think they are.  Carbon dating presumes a relatively constant amount of starting radiation, which then decays.  But if the starting amount of radiation was limited by the water shielding out the cosmic rays, then our measurements would be completely off.  It's like measuring the age of a glass of water by how much evaporates, assuming all glasses of water start out full.  But if a glass of water starts out 1/4 full, then you're going to assume it's a lot older than it really is. 

 

[praise_yeshua]

A matter of orthodoxy, no.
The ability to have a cohesive view of original sin and death, yes.

Why are you removing the doctrine of orginal sin from orthodoxy?

You know the forum nut doesn't believe in an orthodox view of orginal sin.

 

[prophet]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

Or, it was divided in Peleg's day...?

Earnestly Contend

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

Or, it was divided in Peleg's day...?

Earnestly Contend

What does Pegleg the pirate have to do with this?

 

[prophet]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

Or, it was divided in Peleg's day...?

Earnestly Contend

What does Pegleg the pirate have to do with this?

Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

Earnestly Contend

 

[prophet]

i like to talk about neolithic..stone age and bronze age cultures as if they occurred tens of thousands of years ago........ but i trust God that if He wanted to put earth and everything else in the universe together in 7 literal days a mere 7 thousand years ago..... and give it all the built in appearance of age equal to millions of years.... with dinosaurs on one continent and human beings on another prior to the flood...... . He could have easily done so.........

but since the scientific evidence is just as subject to interpretation as genesis 1..... maybe more so.... i choose to believe the christian orthodox version of a young earth........ how young?........i don;t know..... i don;t believe it;s billions or even millions of years...... ... but i don;t get upset with those disagree with me and say it is either.......  ???......however.... ... i do get irritated with those who say my belief in a younger earth indicates a lack of education............ that;s when i have to retort that their view indicates a lack of faith........ ..... oddly enough, very few of them disagree with me on that.....  :-\

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

Or, it was divided in Peleg's day...?

Earnestly Contend

What does Pegleg the pirate have to do with this?

Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

Earnestly Contend

Joktan is a cool name.

Earnestly Contend

 

[praise_yeshua]

How much difference does it make concerning one's view of the age of the earth?  Does literal interpretation of the Scripture require a young earth view?  Does one's view of this matter rise to the level of heresy?

What do you all think?

It is essential what anyone believes about Adam. Essential. I'd classify it as vital to orthodoxy.

No matter the view, it's essential that Adam not be relegated to some evolving species that form an entire race of people generically referenced as "Adam"

Remove Adam as a singular man created by God and you lose proper focus on the Incarnation.

 

[rsc2a]

A matter of orthodoxy, no.
The ability to have a cohesive view of original sin and death, yes.

Why are you removing the doctrine of orginal sin from orthodoxy?

You know the forum nut doesn't believe in an orthodox view of orginal sin.

I'm so glad I have you to tell me what I think.

Now you lecturing anyone on orthodoxy...next you'll be telling us that God learns!

 

[ddgently]

My opinion is that the earth was one continent pre-flood.  The continent was broken apart by the catastrophe that caused the flood.  It released water under the crust, and the crust was broken into plates and pushed very rapidly apart, forming in just a year or so much of the geology scientists believe formed over millions of years.  The continental drift of today is just the remaining energy still being released.  That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it until someone can convince me otherwise, or I get to heaven and find out differently. 

That doesn't prove anything about the age of the earth, but it makes a lot more sense to me than what we're being fed by so-called scientists. I was shocked and delighted to learn that a professional geologist (a geologic engineer whose job it is to map underground caves and detect sources of oil in Missouri) believes in almost exactly the same hypothesis.

Do you mean it?

http://ageofrocks.org/about/
http://ageofrocks.org/100-reasons-the-earth-is-old/

tl;dr He's a Christian geologist compiling evidence of an old earth attempting outreach to fellow Christians who hold to a young earth.

 

[FSSL]

How much difference does it make concerning one's view of the age of the earth?  Does literal interpretation of the Scripture require a young earth view?  Does one's view of this matter rise to the level of heresy?

What do you all think?

It is essential what anyone believes about Adam. Essential. I'd classify it as vital to orthodoxy.

No matter the view, it's essential that Adam not be relegated to some evolving species that form an entire race of people generically referenced as "Adam"

Remove Adam as a singular man created by God and you lose proper focus on the Incarnation.

And I know a couple of Calvinists who believe all 5 points are essential to one's savation. They misunderstand sanctification.

If a person cannot be a believer because he believes in an old earth, then we pretty much have a new gospel. There is such a thing as sanctification. Not every believer will become a young earth Creationist. Just because someone has a faulty view of history does not mean he is unorthodox.

An unorthodox person is not a believer. Young earth creationism is not a salvific doctrine.

I bet you and I have a much more fundamental disagreement on original sin.

 

[praise_yeshua]

How much difference does it make concerning one's view of the age of the earth?  Does literal interpretation of the Scripture require a young earth view?  Does one's view of this matter rise to the level of heresy?

What do you all think?

It is essential what anyone believes about Adam. Essential. I'd classify it as vital to orthodoxy.

No matter the view, it's essential that Adam not be relegated to some evolving species that form an entire race of people generically referenced as "Adam"

Remove Adam as a singular man created by God and you lose proper focus on the Incarnation.

And I know a couple of Calvinists who believe all 5 points are essential to one's savation. They misunderstand sanctification.

If a person cannot be a believer because he believes in an old earth, then we pretty much have a new gospel. There is such a thing as sanctification. Not every believer will become a young earth Creationist. Just because someone has a faulty view of history does not mean he is unorthodox.

An unorthodox person is not a believer. Young earth creationism is not a salvific doctrine.

I bet you and I have a much more fundamental disagreement on original sin.

You'd make a wonder politician.....

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Those that believe in an evolutionary creative act of God, deny that Adam was a single man. They teach "Adam" as representing the entire collection of all evolving humanoid species. They do not treat him as a singular man.

When pressed, this belief ultimately leads to the denial of original sin originating in the blood line of a singular man. Thus, denying Acts 17:26. It also destroys a proper picture of the Incarnation.

Obviously, you've never really had a discussion at any length on the matter. In fact, I'm beginning to wonder if you're nothing more than theological "googler"

I never said "Young earth creationism" was a salvific doctrine. Denying the sin of Adam and the distorting the doctrine of the Incarnation IS!!!

 

[praise_yeshua]

I bet you and I have a much more fundamental disagreement on original sin.

Then tell us what "original sin" means to you...