I coerced ICANT into starting this topic because I was pretty clueless about what was his real creationist/anti-evolution position. In other words, what were his objections to the mainstream scientific perspecive of "the way it happened"?
ICANT's message 1 did little to clarify the situation. Thus my (Minnemooseus) message 4, subtitled "What's the time frames, and how about common ancestry", which asked:
What is you opinion on:
The age of the universe?
The age of the Earth?
The age of the first life on Earth?
The age of the first human (Homo sapiens)?
Do the modern great ages (gorillas, chimps) and modern humans have a common ancestor?
A few of my messages later, I got what seems to be the best I was going to get ICANT answer - Message 319. It, in its entirety, is as follows:
This tells me you are agnostic about whether God is behind the ultimate universe origin. Regardless if such is true, such is my position.
I said I have no problem with it. That does not mean I accept it. But I would not limit God. If God spoke all the universe into existence or put it together out of existing material I would think it would be an awesome display of fireworks as everything raced around and got into its place.
You apparently are outside of that mainstream.
I'm not normal that is for sure.
The age of the universe? – Mainstream science has it that the universe as we know it is about 13.5 billion years old. My interpretation is that such DOES NOT conflict with your eternal universe position – The 13.5 billion year universe could be the current version of your larger eternal universe. Again, I personally have no conflict with such a position.
Genesis 1:1 says in the beginning. I have nothing else to go by. If the beginning was 13.7 BYA then that is when it all started. If it was 50 BYA then that is when it started I have no reference for the time and will have to be satisfied with what we can find out from the universe.
The age of the Earth? – Mainstream science has it that the Earth as we know it is about 4.5 billion years old. Does your position conflict with that or are you willing to accept that?
The earth was created in the first light period and could have been 4.5 BYA more or less, I have no reference and will accept what the earth tells us.
The age of the first life on Earth? – Mainstream science has it that life on Earth goes back 3+ billion years. Does your position conflict with that or are you willing to accept that?
I have no problem with that age for life.
The problem is that I believe that life was created by God and was mankind, then plants, then animals, fowls, and then woman.
All of these life forms are extinct and have formed all the many layers we find in the earth. The plates of the earth have moved around so much that I doubt very seriously if any of the larger life forms can be found or identified.
The age of the first human (Homo sapiens)? – Mainstream science has it that the Homo sapiens species goes back many 1000's of years (I don't offhand have a good number). Anyway, this is far outside the mainstream YAC/YEC timeframe of 5 to 10 thousand years. Does your position conflict with that many 1000's of years timeframe or are you willing to accept that?
I believe modern man appeared on the 6th day of God's remodeling job of earth that took place in Genesis 1:2 - Genesis 2:3. Many have said that is 6000 years ago. I don't know because the Bible does not say when it was. Man has figured out a lot of things that he eventually found out he was wrong about. So whatever the bones tell us is OK by me.
Do the modern great ages (gorillas, chimps) and modern humans have a common ancestor? – Mainstream science has it that such is the case. Mainstream creationist position is that humanity was God's special creation and that the great apes of man have no common ancestor. Do you agree or disagree with the mainstream science position?
I believe that God created everything that is alive on the face of the earth today and everything that is extinct. All of these things were created from the same elements by the same creator. Therefore all those things would have many things in common. I believe man is special in that God gave him a special body, with a spirit, and a mind to think, reason, and make decisions with knowing right from wrong.
Mainstream creationist position is that the Noahtic flood was a literal event and that it was a sort of a modification or re-creation event. Mainstream science finds that such a flood never happened. What is your position concerning such a flood?
I am on record here that I believe the flood took place. I really have no time frame for it. I do not believe in any reconstruction during the flood. In fact I don't think there would be any trace of a global flood as YECS put forth.
I am also on record as saying the flood would have been impossible without divine intervention. Which I have no problem with as I believe "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" If God could do that He would have no problem with a little flood.
This is ICANT's position statement. To me, things still seem to be rather murky in regards to and relative to the mainstream scientific perspective. He seems to at the same time have no great objections to the science position, yet he seems to not be willing to accept that position. But perhaps my interpretation/evaluation is the muddled thing.