YE? NE? Does it matter to you as a Christian?

[Jennifer3141]

So we've delved into atheism quite a bit the past few weeks.

 

As an atheist, I'm looking at this Ham person and thinking, "What the heck??"

 

Since apparently neither side can prove to the satisfaction of the other side the age of the earth, does it matter to you whether the earth is 10,000 years old and was created in 6 days or not? Do you feel it makes the bible somehow less significant if science shows the earth to be older than that?

 

Why does it matter?

[Xuzi]

Means absolutely nothing to me what age a Christian believes the earth to be.

 

I'm a theistic evolotionist (is that the right word??). I think the theory of evolution is a possible theory for "How God Did It". We probably will never know for sure, this side of Heaven, HOW God created the universe, our world, us, etc. and IMO, it's not necessary for our Salvation to know for sure. What we DO need to know is that He sent His Son, that He died for us, and that all of us can recieve forgiveness if we believe on His Name.

[simka2]

I live in a divided household :D! I lean far over to the Old Earth camp, while acknowledging that God is big enough to do whatever He likes (I just don't know what future discoveries are going to reveal.) Dh on the other hand has strong YE leanings, while acknowledging that God is big enough to do whatever He wants. Clear as mud?:001_smile: We do teach the kids evolution as the best scientific theory at the moment.

[ChristusG]

Honestly....I don't care how old the earth is and haven't really pondered it. I just know that God created it.

[Parrothead]

If asked I'm an old earther, but the whole young earth/old earth debate is not something that gets my panties in a twist.

[jelbe5]

I lean on the "Young Earth" side. I believe Genesis literally . . . It simplifies things for ME. But I agree with a previous poster that God can do things anyway He chooses, over any time period He chooses. I definitely think there are bigger faith issues than this one and would not attempt to argue with those who are old earth believers. My dh leans on the old earth side.

[KnitWit]

I have always tended to view Genesis as a history book and therefore I have always taken Genesis as a *record* of that history and taken it literally.

 

That said, I am always reading, thinking, pondering... :D

[Joanne]

When I was trying to be a more traditional Christian:

 

I believed the creation story was figurative, but true in a metaphoric sense. I leaned towards "old" earth.

 

Now, as whatever I am:

 

The whole arguement is utterly stupid and I find the science behind young earth theory dubious.

[pdalley]

I probably lean YE but honestly I get hung up on what God's definition of a day is.

 

Peter says a day to God is like a thousand to us. God says many times throughout the Bible that His ways are not our ways, His thoughts not our thoughts.

 

I don't think I'm going to get a pop quiz on the matter when I leave this world so it's not a hill I'd die on so to speak. And when I get to Heaven I'll know for sure.

[GWOB]

Honestly....I don't care how old the earth is and haven't really pondered it. I just know that God created it.

 

This.

 

If asked I'm an old earther, but the whole young earth/old earth debate is not something that gets my panties in a twist.

 

And this.

 

I am a Christian. My salvation is not found in Genesis. It's found in Jesus.

[edithcrawley]

Means absolutely nothing to me what age a Christian believes the earth to be.

 

I'm a theistic evolotionist (is that the right word??). I think the theory of evolution is a possible theory for "How God Did It". We probably will never know for sure, this side of Heaven, HOW God created the universe, our world, us, etc. and IMO, it's not necessary for our Salvation to know for sure. What we DO need to know is that He sent His Son, that He died for us, and that all of us can recieve forgiveness if we believe on His Name.

 

:iagree:

 

I believe the theory that science has provided. I also believe that the Big Bang occurred. God just put the Big Bang in motion, which led to everything being as it is now. It doesn't bother me if other people believe differently.

[Lovedtodeath]

I voted that it matters a little bit. I do not agree that the Earth and Universe are only 6-10,000 years old.

 

I understand where some YE scientists are coming from because they are attempting to prove that the earth is too young for life to have evolved from one simple organism and gone up from there without God's guidance, or at least support the Bible with their science. I think that some YE promoters are too dogmatic in their claims of both science and scripture. My DH calls himself a YE evolutionist because he believes that God created the originals and they evolved from there.

 

I intend to give my children a very good understanding of the theory with the best of secular resources that I can find.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Lovedtodeath

[AnthemLights]

It matters to me very much....just wouldn't say it is a cornerstone, meaning I don't think it is a matter of salvation.

 

Having said that I feel that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that it cannot fail no matter the subject, so I hate to see doubt cast on any part of it. Now I might not like everything that Ken Ham has said/done recently, but I agree 100 percent with him when he says that "the Bible is not a science book, but where it touches on matters of science, it is perfectly accurate."

 

Should I be ducking? :D

[Barry Goldwater]

Apart from Scripture, there is plenty of scientific evidence and theory to support a YE/creationist perspective. Being scientifically literate, and THEN becoming a Christian on top of it, it's very interesting to me to now view the history of the earth from a YE point of view, after being trained for most of my education to accept OE/secular/evolutionary ideology. I find the OE/evolutionary explanations for the earth we see today to be increasingly un-satisfying, scientifically; in addition it clashes with my faith.

 

But...

 

I won't fight over it. I won't challenge a brother's/sister's faith or heart over it.

 

Civil discussion on the topic could be quite enjoyable and interesting...if I ever have one.:tongue_smilie:

[Crissy]

My lack of knowledge regarding the beginning of the universe, or the origin of this planet is not central to my salvation.

I do my best to focus on my faith and my behavior.

[justamouse]

This.

 

I am a Christian. My salvation is not found in Genesis. It's found in Jesus.

 

This.

 

I'm in the theistic evolution camp, but it's nothing I get my panties in a twist over because of what Wendilouwho said.

[kchara]

I voted that it matters, but it's not the cornerstone of my faith. If Ham weren't... what he is... in his approach, I think the foundations behind his argument are right. I have a hard time with the Big Bang Theory and evolution, and I don't consider either to be good science. I will teach them both to my kids, because they need to know, but I'm definitely not going to be presenting them as scientific truth, because I just don't see that there. I'm not an old earther, because as I've read exegesis of Genesis, it became apparent to me that the intended meaning was six literal days.

 

The thing about the Genesis debate is this: If we can discard Genesis as not being literal, what else can we discard? If the OT isn't literal, what about the NT? Was Christ really Christ? Was He needed? Was there a Great War in Heaven? If Adam wasn't literal, then... what's the point? What was the Sacrifice for? That's why people get their drawers in such a wad over this.

 

However, my cornerstone is Jesus. If I believe in the entirety of Scripture, but am willing to disregard His teachings on love, unity, ect., then that strikes much closer to the heart of my faith than the Creation debate.

[Lovedtodeath]

Without getting into my own thoughts on the age of the earth issue... My understanding of what Ken Ham believes that the acceptance of Old Earth and evolution undermines the gospel because the fall makes no sense if disease, death and suffering existed before the fall, which is required for evolution to occur. So teaching that evolution is compatible with Christianity undermines our faith at its very roots. The colored words are simply telling you what he says. I personally don't think that those colored words are the same as saying they aren't Christian or are deserving of eternal ****ation, but YMMV, and perhaps he has said something different than that and I am unaware of it. I read a couple of his books and didn't really care to continue.

 

I have been on forums devoted to the topic while I was researching and I have been labeled an Agnostic Creationist. :)

 

Having said that I feel that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that it cannot fail no matter the subject, so I hate to see doubt cast on any part of it.

:iagree:

[LizzyBee]

I chose the last option. I have always believed in a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the events of Genesis 1-11 are real events, and that the people of Genesis 1-11 were real people. But I can't recall ever hearing of young earth creationism until I moved to North Carolina. I've always believed the earth is old, and some of the most conservative, fundamentalist Christians I know believe the earth is old. It blows my mind that people are so dogmatic about young earthism that they make it foundational to faith.

 

I spent some time reading and researching the issue, thinking that I had to figure out which camp I was in. Then I had an aha moment when I realized that if God thought it was important for us to understand the details of creation, he would have given us more than 3 chapters of the Bible to describe it. I became neither a creationist nor an evolutionist, but a "God did it and I don't much care how" -ist.

 

I have gotten to the point where I am sick of hearing non-scientists discuss the issue regardless of what they believe. I don't want to hear my pastor abuse scientific concepts in the defense of young earth creationism. I don't want to hear evolutionists claim that evolution disproves God. I don't want to read about it, hear about it, and I'm tired of people on both sides trying to convince me or patronizing me if I don't agree with their view.

 

Oh my, I didn't mean to write all that, but I'm going to leave it. Stepping off my soapbox now....

 

ETA: Many discussions on this board have been informative, interesting, and enlightening for me. My irritation about the debate stems from challenges with people I know in real life. The people in church who would lose respect for me if they knew I didn't buy into YEC 100%, the homeschool mom who felt it necessary to warn me that the science books on my bookshelves include evolution content....

Edited April 5, 2011 by LizzyBee

[Happy2BaMom]

I desperately wanted to click two choices - "I'm neutral" AND "I think this debate is utterly stupid".

 

For the record, I'm probably an OE Christian or theistic evolutionist. But I don't really care, and, to me personally, it's utterly beside the point of the Bible (which, in my very small and humble world, is Jesus and His message).

[Wheres Toto]

I was a Christian until I was around 30 years old and I never even heard about the YE/OE debate until I started homeschooling 10 years later.

 

I attended United Methodist and Catholic churches, FWIW.

[Koerarmoca]

It matters to me very much....just wouldn't say it is a cornerstone, meaning I don't think it is a matter of salvation.

 

Having said that I feel that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that it cannot fail no matter the subject, so I hate to see doubt cast on any part of it. Now I might not like everything that Ken Ham has said/done recently, but I agree 100 percent with him when he says that "the Bible is not a science book, but where it touches on matters of science, it is perfectly accurate."

 

Should I be ducking? :D

:iagree:

[Danestress]

It doesn't matter to me what my friend thinks, what my neighbor thinks, what you think. I am fine with differing views. I don't think anyone's salvation is in jeopardy because of the "wrong" view.

 

But in choosing a Earth Sciences curriculum, it does actually matter to me.

 

In choosing a history program, I don't think I would choose a spine that insisted that the earth is 5,000 years old.

 

I'm always fine with presenting my children with different viewpoints and telling them that people disagree, why they disagree, where they find their evidence, etc. But I would not present a history or science curriculum that presents as a fact the idea that the earth is 5,000 years old.

 

So I guess it "doesn't matter" regarding whether I love and respect my friends and family members. But if I am going to shell out big bucks for the homeschool curricula, it matters to me.

[Sputterduck]

It doesn't matter at all to me. It doesn't change that Jesus died on the cross. One or the other being correct doesn't change anything.

 

I couldn't answer the poll because I am a Christian and the topic doesn't matter to me, but I would not say that the entire debate is utterly stupid. That feels insulting. I wouldn't want to insult anyone on either side of that topic.

[OnTheBrink]

It matters to me very much....just wouldn't say it is a cornerstone, meaning I don't think it is a matter of salvation.

 

Having said that I feel that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that it cannot fail no matter the subject, so I hate to see doubt cast on any part of it. Now I might not like everything that Ken Ham has said/done recently, but I agree 100 percent with him when he says that "the Bible is not a science book, but where it touches on matters of science, it is perfectly accurate."

 

Should I be ducking? :D

 

I'll duck with you. ;)

 

Apart from Scripture, there is plenty of scientific evidence and theory to support a YE/creationist perspective. Being scientifically literate, and THEN becoming a Christian on top of it, it's very interesting to me to now view the history of the earth from a YE point of view, after being trained for most of my education to accept OE/secular/evolutionary ideology. I find the OE/evolutionary explanations for the earth we see today to be increasingly un-satisfying, scientifically; in addition it clashes with my faith.

 

But...

 

I won't fight over it. I won't challenge a brother's/sister's faith or heart over it.

 

Civil discussion on the topic could be quite enjoyable and interesting...if I ever have one.:tongue_smilie:

 

:iagree:

[WTMindy]

I believe God created the world although I have no idea how he did it. I know he could have done it in 6 literal days if he wanted to. Or, have used long days. But, because I can't prove anything, and I don't believe salvation hinges on this belief I tread very lightly about this issue. It saddens me to see Christians so divided!

 

I wouldn't say that the issue doesn't matter, but I would say that it isn't a matter of salvation.

[Lovedtodeath]

Civil discussion on the topic could be quite enjoyable and interesting...if I ever have one.:tongue_smilie:

I have had quite a few of them. It really improved my understanding of both YEC and Evolution, since I started out a OEC. If anyone wants to know where to go for civil discussion on the topic then shoot me a PM or email. Highly intelligent, logical people and polite people of great faith can be found on both sides of the debate.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Lovedtodeath

[mama2cntrykids]

This.

 

 

 

And this.

 

I am a Christian. My salvation is not found in Genesis. It's found in Jesus.

AMEN!

[GraciebytheBay]

Honestly....I don't care how old the earth is and haven't really pondered it. I just know that God created it.

 

:iagree:

[iona]

This is why I think it matters:

 

For some- How does not taking a "literal" view of the creation account or other parts of Genesis affect how you read the rest of the bible?...that it all falls apart in a sense if you don't hold to the literal 6 day/24 hour creation.

(many YEers don't hold the exclusive "you must believe this" view though)

 

Others see trying to incorporate evolution into the Genesis account not as an honest search for truth but an allowing of "worldy/secular" thought to influence us more than it should.

 

For me, whether or not adam was an actual person is more important theologically. (sin entering the world and affecting all mankind) which is where some of the criticism of Enns comes in. From what i can glean, he doesn't hold to a literal adam, but holds to a fallen world. I'm still trying to figure all of this out. Many OEers believe in a literal/historical adam.

 

i found this article helpful in understanding the issue more, and the author discusses what he finds as problematic thinking(not holding to a historical adam) while at the same time not questioning the soundness or reality of the faith of those who hold to that thinking.

 

http://www.biologos.org/uploads/projects/Keller_white_paper.pdf

 

i hope that is helpful:)

[Chris in VA]

I think the earth is older than YE provides for, but not as old as evolution says.

I don't think the generations listed in Genesis list everyone, so I don't use them to count up the years. Could have been six literal days. Could have been longer.

 

I do believe there was a real Adam and a real Eve. Just not sure what it all looks like, how long it took, where it took place. I believe in a world wide flood. I believe in a real Abraham. I

 

I believe there was death and decay before Adam. I believe he actually ate food and that food decayed in his system. I believe animals died. But that's not the only death of scripture--it's talking about a spiritual death, too, a separation of what is holy and what is no longer holy. I believe he made a conscious choice and lost what God had for him. Eve, too. I believe the ramifications of sin are all around us, have gotten into our actual DNA, and are responsible for the suffering we see. I believe the creation stories in Genesis are a different form of literature than, say, the Gospels, and therefore cannot be read the same way.

 

I think God will one day tell us what and how and when and why--And maybe he can't right now in a way that is super detailed, because we aren't smart enough or capable of understanding just how it did it all.

 

I rest in the fact that God is bigger than his creation. I wouldn't want to worship a God I could totally explain, anyway.

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

Apart from Scripture, there is plenty of scientific evidence and theory to support a YE/creationist perspective. Being scientifically literate, and THEN becoming a Christian on top of it, it's very interesting to me to now view the history of the earth from a YE point of view, after being trained for most of my education to accept OE/secular/evolutionary ideology. I find the OE/evolutionary explanations for the earth we see today to be increasingly un-satisfying, scientifically; in addition it clashes with my faith.

 

 

 

:iagree:

[EKS]

As an atheist, I'm looking at this Ham person and thinking, "What the heck??"

 

 

 

:iagree:

[silliness7]

It matters to me very much....just wouldn't say it is a cornerstone, meaning I don't think it is a matter of salvation.

 

Having said that I feel that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that it cannot fail no matter the subject, so I hate to see doubt cast on any part of it. Now I might not like everything that Ken Ham has said/done recently, but I agree 100 percent with him when he says that "the Bible is not a science book, but where it touches on matters of science, it is perfectly accurate."

 

Should I be ducking? :D

 

:iagree:

 

I'll stand with you. There are so many things in Genesis that would make no sense to me if God used a cycle of life/mutation/better life leading to a new species/death/life/mutation/better life leading to a new species/death etc,etc., ad nauseum to create the world. I have no problem with a day equaling 1,000 years in God math. I do have a problem with the concept of God using death to create all the wondrous variety of life.

 

I can't get past the idea that physical death not just spiritual death is indeed a great enemy. I mean Christ's spiritual separation from God was intimately connected with his physical death. I'm not ready to separate those two. I also think God's pronouncing, "It is good," rings hollow if indeed He did use a life/death process. At what point is it good? Even now, creation isn't finished. It's, theoretically, still evolving. Evolving as opposed to adapting which I understand does happen.

 

But though it's important it's certainly not a cornerstone. Christ is the cornerstone. It's all about Him.

[UnsinkableKristen]

I said that I think the whole debate is dumb.

 

My Dh has always pointed out that God is obviously capable of creating aged things - Adam was not created as a baby, but as a fully grown man. Surely, God could create Earth the same way, if He so pleased. Whether or not that is how He did it, I don't really care. I am in awe of what He made and thankful for it everyday, and He can tell me how he did it if/when He so pleases. Until then, I'll just enjoy the earth no matter how old it is.

[Onceuponatime]

It doesn't matter to me what my friend thinks, what my neighbor thinks, what you think. I am fine with differing views. I don't think anyone's salvation is in jeopardy because of the "wrong" view.

 

But in choosing a Earth Sciences curriculum, it does actually matter to me.

 

In choosing a history program, I don't think I would choose a spine that insisted that the earth is 5,000 years old.

 

I'm always fine with presenting my children with different viewpoints and telling them that people disagree, why they disagree, where they find their evidence, etc. But I would not present a history or science curriculum that presents as a fact the idea that the earth is 5,000 years old.

 

So I guess it "doesn't matter" regarding whether I love and respect my friends and family members. But if I am going to shell out big bucks for the homeschool curricula, it matters to me.

 

:iagree:

 

This is the way in which it matters to me too. I have reached the point of theistic evolution in my thinking, and I feel it is necessary to be totally honest with my children and explore all points of view. Then I tell them what I believe and why.

 

I did the same thing when I believed in a young creation.

 

It doesn't matter to me what other people believe about the subject, however I will confess to being slightly irritated when I hear a friend or two repeat some of the rhetoric that I used to use, especially when they assume I agree. I do try to excercise restraint. :D

[Slartibartfast]

I believe the earth is much older than 10,000 years.

 

I don't think it is important except when choosing curriculem.

[LMD]

I lean towards the YE side, mainly because I think God gave us Genesis written as it is for a reason. It is not the cornerstone of my faith, Jesus is, but the theology in Genesis does impact the rest of scriptural understanding IMO.

 

I don't get into knock down, drag outs over it though.

[Heather in Neverland]

I am YE because I interpret the Bible literally, but I do not think it affects your salvation. There are "spine" issues and there are "rib" issues. This is a rib issue to me.

 

Ken Ham's basic stance is that he interprets the Bible literally as well BUT he adds to that "and if you do not understand Genesis to be literal the you must not believe the rest of the Bible literally either therefore you are calling God a liar and you are not a Christian."

 

This is a false dilemma. There are many, many famous theologians that interpret large parts of the Bible literally but see others as symbolic. For instance, R.C. Sproul uses a literal hermeneutic for most of his theological writings but is more symbolic when it comes to eschatology.

 

Does Ken Ham feel the same way about Sproul as he does SWB and Enns? Or is his ire saved only for those who do not have a literal interpretation of Genesis but he pays no attention to the rest of their theology? And wouldn't that be awfully hypocritical of him? Just wondering aloud here...

[TKDmom]

If were important for us to know how God created the Earth, there'd be a lot more than 2 chapters of the Bible devoted to it.

[stephanier.1765]

I'm not a Christian but I don't believe it matters in the end. Either way we've ended up at this same point of here and now.

[Embassy]

No, it doesn't matter. There are far more important things a Christian should focus on.

 

That said, I am rather open-minded on the issue. I do tend to lean towards a literal Genesis with a young creation and an old earth or the gap theory.

[Xuzi]

I said that I think the whole debate is dumb.

 

My Dh has always pointed out that God is obviously capable of creating aged things - Adam was not created as a baby, but as a fully grown man. Surely, God could create Earth the same way, if He so pleased. Whether or not that is how He did it, I don't really care. I am in awe of what He made and thankful for it everyday, and He can tell me how he did it if/when He so pleases. Until then, I'll just enjoy the earth no matter how old it is.

See now, I've heard this argument before, but wouldn't that make God a deciever? "Tricking" us into thinking the world is older than it is? What would be the purpose of that? <-- rhetorical questions there.

[Pretty in Pink]

I am a Christian, and I voted that the whole debate is stupid. I couldn't care less what my neighbor or friend believes in regards to the age of the Earth. It's something that I consider when choosing curriculum (science and history). Beyond that, I won't waste my time trying to convice someone else one way or the other.

 

FTR, I do believe that evolution occured and that the Earth is quite old.

[Forget-Me-Not]

I'm a theistic evolotionist (is that the right word??). I think the theory of evolution is a possible theory for "How God Did It". We probably will never know for sure, this side of Heaven, HOW God created the universe, our world, us, etc. and IMO, it's not necessary for our Salvation to know for sure. What we DO need to know is that He sent His Son, that He died for us, and that all of us can recieve forgiveness if we believe on His Name.

 

:iagree: I lean towards theistic evolution, but if I'm wrong about it, I'll be okay with that.

 

I absolutely believe in a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Fall.

[LidiyaDawn]

I need an option for: Idon'tknow Idon'tknow Idon'tknow *stress* :tongue_smilie:

[Sputterduck]

See now, I've heard this argument before, but wouldn't that make God a deciever? "Tricking" us into thinking the world is older than it is? What would be the purpose of that? <-- rhetorical questions there.

 

Same reason they distress furniture? Maybe God likes shabby chic? :lol:

[Hannah C.]

I lean towards YE but mostly I think there are other way more important things to worry about. I don't have a fixed position besides God created it. I don't know enough about science to judge those arguments. However I do believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

[dakarimom5]

:confused::confused: I never really thought or cared about how old the earth is. It doesn't really matter to me as a Catholic or as a person in general.

 

And as much as I have tried to follow all the threads, I am very confused about what is going on with AIG, Ham, SWB and why it should matter to me to know the story.:confused::001_huh:

[Emmy]

I believe there will be people on both sides of this issue in heaven. I agree with the poster above that said - my salvation is in Jesus, not in Genesis.