Old Earth Creationism

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lcash:
I am an OEC an proud of it. I work in petroleum geology and can tell you that the earth is older than YEC's believe. YEC's believe that the earth is about 6,000 years old. I am of the progressive creation group that believe in an old earth 4.5 billion years old give or take a few and that God specialy created life in series over the last 3.5 billion years. If you want to know more about Inteligent Design go to

​

Home - Reasons to Believe

---

Welcome lcash,I was wondering if you could answer a question about ID for me?How do we tell the difference between an Intelligently Designed system and a natural one which we,1) do not understand yet, and/or2) do not have the intelligence to understand?It seems to me that unless there is some way to tell the difference between them, there is no way of telling what is ID and what has arisen naturaly but that we do not currently understand.It seems to be the classic "God of the Gaps" fallacy.Thanks in advance,Allison [/QUOTE][This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-17-2002][This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-17-2002]

Allison,Great question! In Inteligent Design we operate on the premise that all things whether we understand the preccess or not are designed by a higher inteligence than us. Let me explain. If evolution were true then we have to explain how the conditions existed in the first place to allow evolution. As for the Universe and Life in general, there are so many areas that have to be fine tuned to such a degree that it would be impossible for man to duplicate in a laboratory even with our best equipment and expertise. Things such as Gravity, The amount of mass in the universe, the size and orbit of the moon, the placement of earth in relation to the sun and the other large planets, the placement of the solar system in the galaxie. If any of these areas of placement or measure were off even by a small amount it would be impossible for life to exist. For a complete list of the probabilities go to 20020502_life_support_body_prob.[Shortened long link. --Admin]My point in all of this is to say that our understanding was predicted in the scriptures when it states that the Creater would be revealed in the Creation. So it matters not that we Understand the causes but the significant amount of areas that have to be exact dictates that it did not happen by chance.Lcash[This message has been edited by Lcash, 11-21-2002][This message has been edited by Admin, 11-21-2002]

Lcash, you illustrate beautifully the problems with ID.Firstly, you assume intelligent design by some higher intelligence. Then you go looking for evidence to support your assumption. Could this be why ID has never seen the light of day in scientific journals?Secondly, you make the explicit connection (most IDists are quite coy about doing this in writing) between the assumed intelligent design and a particular religious text which claims it is inspired by a creator. Perhaps you could explain why this text should be preferred over other religious materials which claim to be inspired by a creator of the world. I like the Australian aboriginal rainbow serpent creation myth. Explain why the world wasn't intelligently designed by the rainbow serpent.

LcashGeology has taught me that most of the sedimentary tocks on our continents are due to marine inundations. The higher order sea-level curves are of global extent.From a Genesis flood POV we shouldn't even expect to see a completely global covering. The highlands would be the last to be covered and would only receive a sprinlking of sediment compared to the basins. And the highlands would be preferentially eroded after the event.As a Christian, how can you be so sure that God didn't do exactly what he said and rapidly generate a global flood by whatever means?If God is able to deposit new species from his workshop at regular intervals, then why can't he also accelerate tectonic events and use precisely the mainstream discovered processes to baptize the Earth as he said he did? Why can't the sea-floor spreading, continental drift and mainstream observed inundations be the Genesis Flood?[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 11-21-2002]

Tranquility Base,I believe that the Genesis flood was a regional flood and not global. Before you call me a heretic let me explain. When the scriptures say the whole world it does not always mean the global earth but the area populated by the KNOWN humans. Such an instance happens in the New Testament when Paul says to the Christians at Rome that their faith is being reported over all the earth. Now I'm sure he wasn't talking about the Aboriginies or the Native Americans but the Roman Empire which was to Paul the whole world. As to a global flood their is much evidence to say that it did not happen such as lake varves, where a still lake lays down a layer of clay each year it starts as a lighter shade and becomes darker as winter turns to fall when the pollen mixes in to darken the clay so you can cut through and count the layers much like a tree ring. The lake in question has to be still, no current and that would not have happened in the event of a flood. We have seen lake varves that stretched millions of years without an anomoly for a flood. The second reason I believe that the flood was regional was in the nature of God. God's judgement was because of mans sin. so everything affected by man, his possesions, his animals, and his life would be destroyed. Life in Antarctica and North America at that time had no contact with man and therefore did not have the taint of man's sin upon it and would not have had to be destroyed in judgement. the flood could have been over the Mesopotamian Valley because until the 10th chapter of Genesis there were no place names given where man lived outside of Mesopotamia. There is evidence that there was a great flood in that region from the Black sea to the Persian Gulf over to the Mediteranian about 6900 to 7500 years ago, that could have been the one. As to rapid tectonics and flood scenarios it would have destroyed all life including Noah if the tectonic plates moved more than about 1 foot of tectonic uplift per day would destroy any modern city and produce volcanism that would blot out all sunlight similar to a nuclear winter that would have destroyed the ability of the earth to rebound from the flood.Lcash

LcashThe flood clearly mentions that the high hills and mountains were covered for much of a year. Even if that was a local observation it still means a global event unless you know something about water that I don't know.Have you seen the layering experiments of Berthault? I have it on video from AIG. It is simply a presumption to say that they always formed slowly.If you are looking for a flood anomoly somewhere in the record you are clearly starting of with an assumption that the Bible is wrong. If the Bible is literally true then most of the geo-col is the flood. In 4500 years we would see very little gradual layering.Why would rapid plate tectonics have to kill the occupants of the ark? Would not God have sufficently prepared Noah et al? He told Noah to do it exactly as he was told, just as Moses was told precisely how to build the tabernacle and the apostles how to build the church. And who says there wasn't a nuclear winter during the flood?Peter the apostle connects the flood with the firey judgement to come in:

quote:

---

2 Pet 3:6,7 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

---

The flood is connected to God's firely refinement of this planet 'by the same word'. The flood was as real an event as the refinement to come is.

Tranquility Base,Have you ever heard of a tsunami. These are usualy caused by tectonic plate movement, earthquakes under the sea floor and spread out over large areas as fast as 600mph. In the scenario of rapid tectonic plate movement you would have wave after wave af at least 300ft or more in height. The Ark that was constructed would be woefully small to house 2 of every animal on the face of the earth but would handle the regional animals quite nicely. I have not had a predisposition as to whether the flood was global or regional because I believe that either way it happened and Noah was spared. What makes you so adamant that it HAD to be global, there is nothing in scripture that is lessened by a regional flood as opposed to global.Let me ask you another question. How old do you think the earth is?Your Brother in Christ
Lcash[This message has been edited by Lcash, 11-22-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lcash:
Allison,

​

Great question! In Inteligent Design we operate on the premise that all things whether we understand the preccess or not are designed by a higher inteligence than us.

---

Why?What is the positive evidence for this higher intelligence?

quote:

---

Let me explain. If evolution were true then we have to explain how the conditions existed in the first place to allow evolution.

---

Not at all.Evolution could be true no matter how the first life got here. This is why the ToE and Abiogenesis theories are separate. The ToE deals with how life behaves once it got here, no matter how it got here.

quote:

---

As for the Universe and Life in general, there are so many areas that have to be fine tuned to such a degree that it would be impossible for man to duplicate in a laboratory even with our best equipment and expertise.

---

So what? We can't duplicate a lot of things, but how does human limitation automatically mean that a higher intelligence designed anything?You assume that life had to start on earth and not somewhere else in the universe.

quote:

---

Things such as Gravity, The amount of mass in the universe, the size and orbit of the moon, the placement of earth in relation to the sun and the other large planets, the placement of the solar system in the galaxie. .

​

[Shortened long link. --Admin]

---

No."If any of these areas of placement or measure were off even by a small amount it would be impossible for life as we know it to exist."This doesn't mean that different life might not have arisen. In fact, considering that there are life forms today which operate quite nicely at very high temperatures, without oxygen, etc, who is to say what natural selection might have come up with if the environment had been slightly different?

quote:

---

My point in all of this is to say that our understanding was predicted in the scriptures when it states that the Creater would be revealed in the Creation. So it matters not that we Understand the causes but the significant amount of areas that have to be exact dictates that it did not happen by chance.

---

But...You didn't answer my question.How do we tell the difference between an ID system and a natural one which we;1) don't understand yet, or2) don't have the intelligence to understand?------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-23-2002]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by schrafinator:
[B]
[QUOTE]Things such as Gravity, The amount of mass in the universe, the size and orbit of the moon, the placement of earth in relation to the sun and the other large planets, the placement of the solar system in the galaxie. [/b][/quote]I'm starting a new thread on this. I've been meaning to do so for a week now but haven't gotten around to it yet.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

LcashGenesis gives month by month blows of the height of the flood. It mentions the water level relative to the high mountains. The entire process took over a year (Gen 6-8):

quote:

---

17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. 24 The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days. 3 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, 4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. 5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible.

---

You simply can't cover high mountains, let alone high hills, for months at a time without it being global. There is nowhere on earth that anything like that could occur.What do you think of the fact that Peter links the flood to the 2nd coming events 'by the same word'? Are the 2nd coming events local also?I understand your position. I just can't believe it. Why this great attachment to the fairtales of science? Have you read about the egotistical Christians who devised gradualistic geology and biology in the 19th century? It was a fame and fortune thing. Buckland saw gravel transport in shallow layers across England and declares that to be the flood. Looking for flood anaomalies in the geo-col? You are making the same mistake that they did.

Tranquility Base,I have no attatchment to either case, I just call it as I see it. You have to explain the lake varves. You can't with flood geology. Lets look at Peters linking End times judgement to the flood. Is the end times judgement a judgement of the physical earth or is it a judgement of Men and Nations? I suspect the latter. That being said why would God have to destroy the entire earth in a global flood instead of the place where man is only. Lets look at the High hills argument. there are many places that you could flood the high hills and not be a global flood. Remember that if the flood is regional it pertains to Mesopotamia and that could very well cover the high hills and not be global. Secondly, the scripture says that the water went back from whence it came. Meaning that the water in the form of rain was taken back into the atmosphere and that which came out of the aquifers was taken back into the earth, which means that the water is still there. There is not enough water in the clouds or in the aquifers to cause a global flood but there is for a regional flood. Also when Noah sent out the dove and it brought back the olive branch with leaves where did it get an olive branch with leaves if the earth had been covered globaly for 10 months. Olive trees only grow in low altitudes not in high altitudes so the flood must have been regional. Also how did the olive trees and other green things survive an inundation with salt water and return to leave within 10 months. My point is that God could have accomplished His purpose with a regional flood, it does not take anything away from the redemption of Noah and his family and the type and shadow of the redemption to come. If we tie our faith to things like the flood or the exact creation events we set ourselves up to loose faith if those things are proven wrong. I believe that we need to keep an open heart to the interpretation of the book of Genesis and not get tied down into the specifics of the debate as a basis for our faith. I believe in the redemption provided by Jesus Christ for all mankind and no discovery of science will stop that faith.Your Brother in Christ.
Lcash

LcashMuch of what you say is fine and it's great we share the important aspects of Christianity. However, many of your key statements are only rhetoric:(i) Covering high hills for 150 days? Where can you do that? And it mentions both hills and mountains anyway.(ii) There is plenty of water to cover the enitre earth if we also assume that continental drift and the mountain building occurred as part of the event. Even mainstream we understand that sea levels have fluctuated by almost a kilometer. And that is a lower estimate as I have explained here before.(iii) The end time judgements concern the whole universe - not just us! The stars will be rolled away, there'll be a new heavens and a new earth. It's not YECs that limit God. God has 'limited' himself - he has gone on record. If He says the stars will be rolled away like a scroll then I believe Him. The flood will be a triviality compared to that cosmological event.Man is closely linked to his land. The curses of the fall that effected man also affect his land. Why? becasue with God it is always first natural, then spiritual. The entire Old Testamnet is a testimony to this principle. The NT book of Hebrews explains it in black and white. Everything the Israelites did was both real and yet only a 'shadow'. For some reason God teaches us from physical examples. Adam and Eve created on the eve of a rest day even speak of the coming 'marriage' of Christ to his bride on the eve of the millenium (Heb 4, Rev 20).

quote:

---

Behe shares almost none of Philip Johnson's views. For one thing, Johnson is a YEC, thereby rejecting much of modern geology, physics, astronomy and cosmology, while Behe accepts the positions of all these sciences. Behe accepts most of evolution, but he believes he's found evidence of intelligent design in the form of irreducibly complex microbiological structures. In other words, though he believes that evolution played a significant role in life's history, he believes that intelligent design played an even more signficant role by helping life over certain humps that were otherwise insurmountable.

---

Above is from Percy, at the "New abiogenesis news article 4/12/02" topic at:
http://EvC Forum: New abiogenesis news article 4/12/02 -->EvC Forum: New abiogenesis news article 4/12/02Also, from Andya Primanda (same topic as above)-
http://EvC Forum: New abiogenesis news article 4/12/02 -->EvC Forum: New abiogenesis news article 4/12/02 :

quote:

---

The website does not say much about creationism. Just a link to the Access Res.Network. Maybe we should anticipate Behe's acceptance of evolution in the near future? Michael Denton turned from creationist to evolutionist after he looked at the facts. Seems that the creationists have forgotten about him.

---

Now, all this seems to be getting far from any abiogenesis discussion, so I thought I'd use it to bump my "Old Age Creationism" topic.Comments:
Johnson is a Old Earth Creationist, inteligent design, progressive creationist variety.Behe is an evolutionist; I guess the theistic variety.MooseAdded by edit:
ps - Also see Andya Primanda's Behe topic at:
http://EvC Forum: Behe on organismal evolution -->EvC Forum: Behe on organismal evolution[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 01-18-2003]