Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   TEMPORARY: So how did the GC (Geological Column) get laid down from a mainstream POV?
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 117 (10842)
06-02-2002 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Minnemooseus
06-01-2002 12:21 AM


Moose, yes, I am taking almost the standard YEC position.
Good quesiton about pre-flood rocks. The standard YEC stance would be created bedrock and then non-fossil containing layering from creation day 3 when the land emerged from the sea. My personal theology on this issue is that I tend to believe (although I'm not overly dogmatic on it) that the creation days were 1000 year days as discussed in 2 Pet and Psalms (in the context of creation and the flood). This sounds like day-age stuff but I believe it for theological reasons (1000y days obviously wont allow for evoltuion etc anyway).
The 1000 year days has a fascinating story behind it. Basically earth history can be conidered as a creative 'week' and a redemptive 'week'. The redemptive week is 7 1000 year days starting from 4000BC. We get 3 lots of 2000 year periods that align with Father, Son and Holy Spirit respectively. The 'father dispensation' begins with the father of all (Adam, 4000BC) to the father of 'all who believed' (as Abraham is called 2000BC). The 'son dispensation' begins with an only begotten son (Isaac, 2000BC) and ends with 'the' only begotten son (Christ, about 0 BC). The 'Holy Spirit' dispensation begins with the first 'outpouring' (Acts 2, 30AD) and ends, in this scenario, with the promised and in some opions begun 'last' outpouring of he Holy Spirit (about now). In Heb 4 'another' rest day like that of the creation week is described and this is clearly the Millenium = 1000y of Revelations. So in this scenario we could possibly, although non-dogmatically, expect the creation week to be 7000 years as well. This would give possibly enough time to generate the layers as the earth came up out of the sea on day 3. Standard YECs would probably insist this occured in a literal 24 hr day whereas my opinon would be that it occurred in a 1000 year 'day' as hinted at in Heb 4, Rev 22, Psalms and 2nd Pet. So that's a theological reason for having more time to create vast pre-flood sedimentry formations. It also has more important consequences for some Christians obviously. It's obviously hooey for a lot of other people of course.
You think our flood couldn't have generated the flood rock sediment? Mt St helen's demonstrated carving out of hard rock as well which suprsied me. I am satisfied that the flood, although instigated by God, occurred thourgh primarily actualistic means. The details are yet to be worked out, sure. God seems to have a habit of 'first the natural, then the sprititual' as my triune dispensational view of earth history (above) hints.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-01-2002 12:21 AM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-02-2002 11:52 PM Tranquility Base has replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 117 (10851)
06-03-2002 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Minnemooseus
06-02-2002 11:52 PM


Moose, the pre-flood sediment would come from catastophic weathering of the creation day 3 event.
I was recently surprised to learn the MSH carved canyons out of existing hard rock as well as new sediments.
I am using 'actualism' in exactly the same sense as you would. I believe each particle followed newtonian paths from their beginning to resting places regardless of the God having instigated things through, eg, accelerated radioisotopic decay.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-02-2002 11:52 PM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-03-2002 12:22 AM Tranquility Base has replied
 Message 82 by edge, posted 06-03-2002 1:28 AM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 117 (10856)
06-03-2002 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Minnemooseus
06-03-2002 12:22 AM


Maybe I'm missing something here, but wouldn't the land emerging rapidly from the sea be considered a catastrophic weathering event?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-03-2002 12:22 AM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-03-2002 1:13 AM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024