If your family has a young earth view (or not)....

[lea_lpz]

I am currently using MFW K for my dd, 5, and am going to be starting a dinosaur unit next week. I am conflicted about whether or not to read the book, What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs, which is scheduled for reading next week along with the unit.

 

I am a new Christian. I was raised Catholic, although we seldom attended Mass and I never made conformation, and didn't attend church again until about 2 years ago. We've been attending a non denominational Christian church for the last two years. I went to public school, all the way up through public university at the graduate school level. I have very limited information about the young earth / creationist view of science and was taught the standard evolution theory. I am by no means a science buff. I took only the required science classes to fullfill my general education requirements in college and took the classes which are typically taken by humanity and social sciences students.

 

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

 

I know she is in kindergarten, so reading the book and saying, this is a creationist view point that some people believe, etc, would be fine, or just skipping the book would be fine, too. After all my child is 5, so I don't really have to make this decision quite yet. But, I would personally like to learn more about this so that I can make a solid choice when I do have to begin teaching this.

[Joshin]

I am not a Christian nor to I support young earth creationism (YEC) or other religious-based 'science.' I do think it is important to realize creationism, YEC and ID (intelligent design) are not technically theories. By standard scientific definitions they qualify as hypotheses. Theories and laws are tested and accepted as scientific fact (Thus evolution theory, gravity theory and heliocentric theory). YEC, and ID have not passed peer review and have not supplied enough facts, outside of one document (the Bible) to pass into theory acceptance.

 

Theories become laws is a common misconception. Laws pertain to what happens, while theories encompass the why and how of the things that happen.

 

I am not trying to upset those that believe differently, I just think to properly assess any information you must first start with a correct understanding of the scientific method and what theory and law actually mean. :001_smile:

[EKS]

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

 

 

 

No.

[a27mom]

Reading a unbiased view is not an option. All scientists whether they are young earth or old earth are biased. There actually are many scientific theories in ye. According to the above definition evolution also would not be a theory. But there are many theories from an evolutionary perspective.

 

basically you need to learn the biased information from both sides in order to truly make a decision.

 

Since you have learned the basics of evolutionary viewpoint. I would suggest reading lots of the young earth books for kids as a start. Then you can delve deeper. Answers in Genesis is admittedly very biased. They will tell you this themselves, but they have lots of scientific information available. I am not sure where to find a good source on the evolutionary viewpoint, since I studied biology heavily at a secular university I have not felt a great need to review the basics.

 

As far as teaching I would just tell your son, that you don't know, if he asks. You can let him know both sides if you want. I would probably just wait until you are better able to address it.

 

Btw, I have studied science more than the average person, I definitely find ye plausible. I was raised in a Christian home, but my parents did not start to consider the ye position until about the time I did in high school, so I don't feel my bias came from childhood. Though I do have th bias of always believing in God and the Bible.

[HappyGrace]

You will get many STRONG opinions on here one way or the other. Please take them all with a grain of salt.

 

I would recommend putting off reading the book for awhile, and do some very prayerful investigation and research and reading on both Old and Young Earth, and see how the Lord leads you. This board would be a very confusing place to get info on this topic-believe me, I've been on here ten years. (Although I'm grateful for the fact that this board was the first place I even heard about OE vs. YE, and then I researched it on my own and now have a strong opinion one way.)

 

Ultimately, none of us knows for sure, so technically, they are ALL theories (including evolution). I will say that God is not bound by man's laws or even by nature itself.

Edited August 31, 2012 by HappyGrace

[Omma]

Consider what you believe about when Adam and Eve sinned. If death only entered the world after they sinned, then the first animal to die was the one God had to kill (for without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins) in order to make a covering of animal skins for Adam and Eve (who were hiding from God and now realized that they were naked).

 

This view helped me to understand that there couldn't have been millions of years of dinosaurs if there was no death until sin came into the world (when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit). And it makes sense to me that most of the fossils likely were formed due to the Genesis Flood... not millions of years earlier. The Genesis flood plus the young earth worldview also helps to explain the current human population totals. If people had been around for millions of years and there was no Genesis flood, then the current population could be a 10 with 43 zeroes after it (according to John D. Morris, Ph.D in his book, "The Young Earth", Colorado Springs: Creation Life Publishers, 1994, 70-71. {I took this from a MFW manual that I just read to my dc yesterday :)).

 

Brenda

 

 

Answers in Genesis is a good website to view for the young earth viewpoint.

[HappyGrace]

Consider what you believe about when Adam and Eve sinned. If death only entered the world after they sinned, then the first animal to die was the one God had to kill (for without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins) in order to make a covering of animal skins for Adam and Eve (who were hiding from God and now realized that they were naked).

 

 

This was the exact thing that helped me.

 

But again, it's one of those things that you have to search out for yourself prayerfully in light of Scripture.

[HappyGrace]

I didn't see the part in the OP asking for resources-Answers in Genesis is probably the best known one for Young Earth; maybe someone else will chime in about Christian Old Earth resources.

[Hen]

I have only been a Christian since high school, and since then I've always considered myself YE. My dh is not, he leans more towards the gap theory, but we are not evolutionists. Lately, I'm not sure what I think about it all, but I do know that some of those YE dinosaur books for young children gave me the creeps. I was uncomfortable with the self-assured, biased tone of them. I am just starting to use MFW this year and I was disappointed to see a few of those books. I'm just going to skip them. I don't mind the Science books for older kids, where we can discuss different views and they can mull over what they believe and feel comfortable knowing that we don't know exactly what happened and we don't know yet exactly how dinosaurs fit in to it all. But yeah, the younger books made me really uncomfortable. I vote for skip them if they make you feel that way, too.

[MeaganS]

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

We don't

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

We teach that God created the world and that he uses natural laws to do so. Evolution seems to be the most plausible way that he created us, but we aren't sure and it doesn't really matter to our salvation. Therefore, as evolution is the accepted theory of our day, we'll work under that assumption.

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

Sorry, no help here.

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

I don't.

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

Not imo, but again, I really do not believe that it matters that much what I think. What matters is following Christ and his commandments. How He created the earth is something I can't even begin to understand at this point in my progression, so I'm not going to argue about it with anyone.

 

This is pretty much my opinion on the matter. I hope you find the information you need to help you decide how to teach your children.

[susankenny]

Just don't read it. She's only 5 and the age of the earth just really has nothing to do with science for a child in kindergarten. Discuss animal habitats, ecosystems, living vs non-living, etc.

 

Susan

[Hope in God]

From what I have studied about YE there is ample evidince to support the theory. The thing about the YE viewpoint is that you do have to actually search out the material. It is not constantly on the front page of the paper like evolution tends to be and it will not simply fall into your lap.

 

Scientists in every field have been taught evolution in all their University studies and the ones that swim upstream and research the assumptions of evolution and look at the evidence objectively are reprimanded and even loose their jobs and reputation. Yet there are still many scientists that support the young earth view despite having all the cards stacked against them.

 

I feel that Science, especially Geology and Cosmology support a YE view. There are major flaws with radioisotpe dating. The same samples often give wildly different dates when different dating methods are used (ex. Carbon vs Radon). Likewise, some samples of rock from the same layer and location will date a wildly different dates using the same dating method. I also find that the assumptions used in evolution theory represent more of a religion than a theory. When these assumptions are challenged (by events like the 1980 eruption of Mt. Saint Helens) the theory of evolution falls apart and is not viable.

 

The evidence is out there for YE and it is worth searching out but it is so much easier for the masses to believe what they are spoon fed.

 

As a side not, I was not always a YEC and I certainly did not get my views from my parents. I weighed the evidence.

[Forgiven]

I am very much a Young Earther. The Mystery of History 1 book explains everything very well. A great book to get from the library is "Dry Bones and Other Fossils".

 

This is a young Earth viewpoint and went along very well with how Mystery of History explains things.

 

Use the Bible. You will find references to dinosaurs in the Bible itself.

 

As a Christian, we should always look to see if the Bible supports a theory.

 

Best of luck to you!

 

Oh, and I read secular books about Dinosaurs to my kids. When they start saying how many millions of years old the dinosaurs are, we all laugh and talk about how dinosaurs were on the earth when people were, that they were on the arc, and that the Earth isn't that old, so how could dinosaurs be? Yes, they know what the theory of evolution is. It would be wrong of me to not expose them to it, but they know it's all hogwash. ;)

[Narrow Gate Academy]

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

I teach my children the viewpoint of young earth creationists, old earth creationists, intelligent designers, and evolutionists. We look at the evidence for and against each one. We look at what the Bible says. We talk about why people choose to believe one over the other. The truth is science can never prove any of these to be conclusively true. I want my kids to understand what each one believes and why. I want them to feel comfortable making their own choice and being able to support it.

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

I'm not sure that finding unbiased information is possible. Answers in Genesis materials are definite YE. Just about any science books at your local library will probably be evolution based.

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

I looked at the evidence on the different sides and made my own choice.

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

I believe there is. There are certainly enough holes and issues with evolution to be skeptical of it.

 

 

HTH

[lotsofpumpkins]

Definitely read the book!

 

Also, to learn more, go to answersingenesis.org and read, read, read.

 

 

:001_smile:

[lotsofpumpkins]

Just don't read it. She's only 5 and the age of the earth just really has nothing to do with science for a child in kindergarten.

 

I disagree. We are forming our children's worldviews, and I want for mine to believe that the Bible is 100% true. That includes creation in 6 literal days. If we tell our dc that Genesis isn't completely true, then why should they believe the parts about Jesus and salvation?

[mumto2]

My son loved that book when he was 5. I spent a lot of time reading it. He is now 12 and both dc's have a teacher/friend who is a paleontologist. He is definately an evolutionist--both dc's enjoy his teaching. They also work with an archaeologist who is YE. He loves to draw on biblical timelines. They are able to learn from both teachers. They are also able to discuss their views with both. That book created a lifelong passion for both children. I don't see how exposure to it can be considered bad. Since it is part of your curriculum I would use it.

[dbmamaz]

Totally secular, evolution-loving mama here. But just wanted to throw this out there - my youngest was 6 when we started homeschooling, and he LOVED the Charlie's Playhouse evolution timeline and cards . . . so its not completely inappropriate to teach to a 5 yo if that is what you want to teach them.

 

Second, there was a book my teen read part of (and i read part of - we ran out of time) called Why Evolution is True. It is written by someone who, iir, was raised YE and changed his mind. We got it out of the library. If you want to read both sides thats a very accessible evolution-side book.

[WishboneDawn]

 

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

I don't.

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

I teach evolution. Not as a view but as a scientific theory.

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

Evolutionary theory is just evolutionary theory (Christians who accept it - and there are many - don't have an alternate view) but you might choose to look at http://www.thegreatstory.org/programs.html for some ideas and programs on helping a child understand it who's coming from the perspective of faith and a creator.

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

I didn't.

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

I have a layman's background in science but I haven't seen anything to convince me that there's any evidence for a young earth. Most of it seems to be word play (equating a scientific theory to the ordinary meaning of theory for instance to say it's "just" a theory) or vague claims that generally don't hold up well to an honest examination.

 

 

I know she is in kindergarten, so reading the book and saying, this is a creationist view point that some people believe, etc, would be fine, or just skipping the book would be fine, too. After all my child is 5, so I don't really have to make this decision quite yet. But, I would personally like to learn more about this so that I can make a solid choice when I do have to begin teaching this.

 

I think that's your best bet. Frances Collins' The Language of God is always reccomended here as an excellent introduction to evolution by an evangelical Christian. Talk Origins has a great archive that contains well researched and properly cited examinations and refutations of creationist claims.

 

It's an important thing to get sorted out. It does matter.

Edited September 1, 2012 by WishboneDawn

[Omma]

I disagree. We are forming our children's worldviews, and I want for mine to believe that the Bible is 100% true. That includes creation in 6 literal days. If we tell our dc that Genesis isn't completely true, then why should they believe the parts about Jesus and salvation?

 

Actually, you are reminding me about something... I feel that the biggest battle my ds went through regarding whether we were going to believe evolution or creation happened when he was in K. He had watched so much Animal Planet and Jeff Corwin was his hero, so it was already getting very difficult to explain Creation to him. He had just about bought into the Evolution mindset (which is all around us in our culture, museums, T.V. shows, etc., as someone has pointed out). I was very thankful for MFW K that year as he made his Creation booklet, etc. And he has continued to be very strongly interested in discussing and even debating Creation vs. Evolution ever since. And to think it all started in kindergarten!!!

 

Have you heard about Vision Forum's Jonathan Park DVD's. They are great (probably for a bit older than your dc, but they come highly recommended...).

 

If you go in a public library (or even a public bookstore), you cannot find science books from the perspective of Creation (ie. in the animal section, for example). So, yes, I agree that you have to really search hard to find science books that are representative of God creating the world (never mind YE vs. OE).

Edited September 1, 2012 by Omma

[lotsofpumpkins]

Omma-

You are right. Evolution is everywhere, even in books where you would not expect it. By teaching them about creation starting when they are very young, they are more prepared to spot information that does not agree with our worldview and we can discuss it.

[jar7709]

I am not YE. I am a professional geologist. Because of that, my kids have been engrossed in earth science, fossils, and evolution since the cradle. They have read one or two YE books they've picked up on the streets, and we've talked about them. IME my kids are not too young to start understanding ideas that arise from scientific methods vs. alternative ideas that arise from the conflict between the scientific methods and previously-held beliefs.

 

As an aside to PP that claim that radioisotope dating is unreliable to the extent that would allow for a YE, that claim makes me twitchy, but this is not the place for a debate. Just please be careful using that arguement.

[susankenny]

I disagree. We are forming our children's worldviews, and I want for mine to believe that the Bible is 100% true. That includes creation in 6 literal days. If we tell our dc that Genesis isn't completely true, then why should they believe the parts about Jesus and salvation?

 

I do too. But if the OP is struggling to reconcile her own beliefs about the age of the earth, she can certainly skip over this with a 5 year old and come back to it later. It really isn't necessary to cover now just because MFW has it scheduled.

 

Susan

[lotsofpumpkins]

I do too. But if the OP is struggling to reconcile her own beliefs about the age of the earth, she can certainly skip over this with a 5 year old and come back to it later. It really isn't necessary to cover now just because MFW has it scheduled.

 

Susan

 

I still recommend that she reads everything she can at the AIG site. That will help her with her own beliefs. Reading the dinosaur book herself before reading it to her child would be a good idea too. (And of course I hope she will decide that YEC is the correct view and teach that to her child, but I do realize that it's not a very popular view these days. :( )

 

OP: I'm sure you are aware that there's a lot of pressure on this board to NOT be YEC. There are a lot of complicated arguments, but really, it comes down to faith. Decide what you are going to believe, and believe it.

[LisaKinVA]

If you are looking for something from an OE Creation standpoint, I suggest Answers in Creation (website), a couple of books I have on my shelf right now include A Biblical Case for an Old Earth, by David Snoke, and It Couldn't Just Happen by Lawrence O. Richards.

 

Some other things I am learning is that often, Creationists confuse how the world and everything came to be as being the "Theory of Evolution" vs. most of the scientists I've read use it to mean explaining how the world we live in works. The Theory of Evolution doesn't seek to explain how everything GOT here (was created), but rather, how things change over time.

 

I believe God is a God of Order, and that we can see God's handiwork in nature. God is the author and designer, but that does not mean the Bible is a step-by-step, paint-by-number picture with every detail of how (or when) it was all accomplished. Man was made in God's image... and when man creates, it is usually a process. Could God have spoken and it just "happened?" yes. Does this mean it is 100% absolutely EXACTLY how it happened? I think there is a lot of grey area there.

 

The Bible is 100% True in it's inspiration and purpose, but that doesn't mean *every* story told within it is historical fact. Jesus spoke in parables (stories) to illustrate deeper truths in a way so that we could understand more clearly what was being taught... I don't see people clamoring over those parts being 100% True, they are stories.

 

In the same way, the Creation Story could be viewed as an overall picture of what God did, vs. a literal, line-by-line, step-by-step, this is exactly how it happened kind of way. There are numerous explanations, and I am shocked so few Christians even know of their existence (some of the explanations I find downright illogical...such as the one that claims that the original sin was $exual between Eve and someone other than her husband...but I digress).

 

I had better stop now...getting long winded, and we have apple picking tomorrow.

[Sue G in PA]

I disagree. We are forming our children's worldviews, and I want for mine to believe that the Bible is 100% true. That includes creation in 6 literal days. If we tell our dc that Genesis isn't completely true, then why should they believe the parts about Jesus and salvation?

 

Yes. This. If you can look at Creation as a myth or just symbolism or whatever then you can also look at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the same thing and then where does that leave us? Either the Bible is 100% TRUE or it is not. We cannot pick and choose. Just my opinion...and after the Bill Nye thread I'm a bit nervous so :auto:

[Peaceful Isle]

Consider what you believe about when Adam and Eve sinned. If death only entered the world after they sinned, then the first animal to die was the one God had to kill (for without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins) in order to make a covering of animal skins for Adam and Eve (who were hiding from God and now realized that they were naked).

 

This view helped me to understand that there couldn't have been millions of years of dinosaurs if there was no death until sin came into the world (when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit). And it makes sense to me that most of the fossils likely were formed due to the Genesis Flood... not millions of years earlier. The Genesis flood plus the young earth worldview also helps to explain the current human population totals. If people had been around for millions of years and there was no Genesis flood, then the current population could be a 10 with 43 zeroes after it (according to John D. Morris, Ph.D in his book, "The Young Earth", Colorado Springs: Creation Life Publishers, 1994, 70-71. {I took this from a MFW manual that I just read to my dc yesterday :)).

 

Brenda

 

 

Answers in Genesis is a good website to view for the young earth viewpoint.

 

:iagree:

[hsmom2011]

n/m

[hsmom2011]

n/m

[abacus2]

If I am remembering correctly, this book has a picture of someone using a dinosaur as a work animal. There is no basis for this in the Bible and certainly not in mainstream science. I considered myself young earth at the time I got that book as part of the MFW K program, but I threw this book away. I think it is arrogant and wrong even from a young earth perspective.

[Free]

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

 

I would not teach anything other than the accepted scientific view in a science class. YEC is not a scientific theory. It may be a hypothesis proposed by a small section of Christians but for it to be accepted as a scientific theory it needs to comprehensively explain all observed biological, geological and cosmological phenomena at least as well as the current theories in science (of which TOE is only one), if not better.

 

Would scientists consider YEC even remotely plausible? The answer is No.

[pahansen]

I was raised in church and have a fairly traditional background. I also never heard of the evolution or YE/OE debates (in any serious way) until I was in my 9th grade Biology class. As I recall, the teacher said about evolution, "You don't have to agree with this or believe this, but you do have to know it for the test." What we did cover was a fairly basic and straightforward explanation of the history and theory of evolution that spanned about 1/4 of a chapter of the textbook. Then we went on to something else. (I later found out that my Bio teacher was very much a Creationist.) There was no pressure to believe any particular thing.

 

Fast forward almost 25 years, and I would say that it is a totally different world we are living in. You can't watch PBS without having some evolutionary education leeching into your kids' entertainment. Animals' traits aren't "specialization" anymore, they're "adaptation". People who who devoutly hold to YE/Creationist views need to push harder and earlier to get those views to their kids before they're old enough to watch Dinosaur Train. The funny thing is, even though I'm not firmly committed to one camp (OE/YE or Creationist/Evolutionist), I'm incredibly frustrated by the push to involve these theories in science lessons for pre-schoolers. I'm with the PP who said that she enjoyed discussing this when her children were older and better able to have deeper discussions on the issues. I agree.

 

Unfortunately, it's hard to stave that off, and you're right in trying to figure out what you believe so that you can figure out what/how to teach. For example, the summer dinosaur class at the Pittsburgh Museum of Natural History has changed immensely in the over the last four years since Thing 1 took it. Now, rather than stressing basic scientific observation with the 4-5 year olds (relative sizes of dinos, identifying different types of dinos, herbivores vs. carnivores, etc.), they are strongly focused on how dinosaurs evolved and became extinct and how you can see dinosaurs alive today when you see a chicken. Why is this important to pre-schoolers? Frankly, all of the death they talked about in the new class was pretty depressing. Thing 3 came home with a poster that had to explain the origins of a juvenile fossil footprint. Her answer? It came from a baby dinosaur getting trapped in a lava flow when her mommy couldn't come and save her; illustrations were included. Thing 1 came home from the same class knowing the difference between a pteradactyl and a pteranadon and having made a pteranadon that flapped its wings when you pulled a string. (BTW, Thing 3 doesn't know the difference.)

 

Like you, my jury is still out on what to believe. I know that I am shaping my kids' worldviews by everything I do (or don't!) say, but I am not comfortable advocating in one direction. And as it has been pointed out before, this is not a salvation issue.

 

Instead, I have tried my best to explain that we really don't know for sure, because God is God, and we are not. We weren't there, and there is no way to prove what happened. We've talked about Genesis 1 and the fact that, because He is God, there's no reason to think that the world couldn't have been created in six days (24 hour days). But because that chapter is poetry, it may have been symbolic and pointing out that there is a Creator, and He created absolutely everything. We've also discussed the references in other parts of the Bible that suggest that God's "day" is not necessarily a 24-hour period, so maybe he created it in that way, but not in 144 hours. I approach it as a wonderful and fascinating mystery, because that's what the act of Creation was.

 

As for evolution (the "man descending from the apes" parts, not the observable fluctuations in populations part), we've discussed that God created man, but we don't know how he did it. The Bible is quite clear that God intentionally created man to be set apart from the animals and to bear His image, so I'm unrelenting on that point, but how is a different question. I do have a devoutly Catholic friend who is comfortable with the fact that, no matter at what point God placed His image in/upon man, it was at that point that man became man. Whether that was while his monkey cousins were swinging in trees or as a totally new and different created being in the Garden, bearing the Image of God is what sets men apart from the animals. I am becoming increasingly drawn to that position.

 

The one thing I do frequently try to drive home to the kids (where their worldviews really are being shaped by me, I think) is that -- however this happened -- none of this came about without God. My major beef with all of the evolutionary teaching for kids is that it comes primarily from an atheistic viewpoint. I make sure to impress that theories change over the centuries, but no matter how we currently believe it happened, God did it. I would urge you to send that message also and to set aside troublesome materials until/unless you feel a clearer answer for yourself. I am happy that my kiddos seem to be getting the "God Did It" message loud and clear, and in another five years or so, when we can have well-informed arguments about the pros and cons of various theories, it should be a rollicking good time around here.

 

Until then, I'll spend my time teaching them "boring" stuff, like how atoms work, what cell structures look like under a microscope, and the physics behind a see-saw. It's not like science has a shortage of interesting topics!

 

--Pamela

[Free]

 

Yes. This. If you can look at Creation as a myth or just symbolism or whatever then you can also look at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the same thing and then where does that leave us? Either the Bible is 100% TRUE or it is not. We cannot pick and choose. Just my opinion...and after the Bill Nye thread I'm a bit nervous so :auto:

It is one thing to say that you will believe the Bible literally no matter what evidence is presented before you like what Dr. Kurt Wise did. It is quite another to misrepresent and misunderstand current science so that it becomes easier for one to reject it.

[lotsofpumpkins]

Would scientists consider YEC even remotely plausible? The answer is No.

 

There are plenty of YEC scientists out there.

 

This is why these conversations are so frustrating and saddening. There are so many comments about how "real science" works and how faith and science can't be mixed, etc. To me, faith and science have everything to do with each other.

 

OP: The reason why so many people think YEC is impossible is because they are looking at the evidence through the wrong glasses. Look at the evidence through glasses of faith in God and belief that His Word is 100% true.

 

And to the poster with the comment about a dinosaur being used for work- why does that seem so ridiculous? Just because the Bible doesn't specifically mention dinosaurs being used for work doesn't mean it couldn't happen. I don't know if it did or not, but I do believe that man and dinosaurs existed at the same time.

 

 

 

Time to get off the computer and supervise some room cleaning...

Edited September 1, 2012 by lotsofpumpkins

[...................]

I've studied it extensively and I don't believe the Bible supports evolution. But I don't believe the Bible necessitates a young earth.

 

Or, it could be a young earth that God created to seem old (just like He created Adam as a grown man rather than an infant.)

 

I think standing on Biblical Creation, is super important, because of the imputation of the sin of Adam. There had to be a real Adam.

 

But making a big deal about the age of the earth is not that important to Christians, historically. I get concerned when Christians like Ken Ham act like there's only one view on the age of the earth. It's poor Biblical scholarship.

 

Lastly, on a purely Scientific standpoint, there is not enough evidence for evolution. Evolution is a THEORY. And it has not been proven. There is also not enough evidence for me to accept it as fact, even aside from my Biblical concerns.

[lotsofpumpkins]

I said I was getting off of here, but I had to add a couple of comments to this post:

 

Like you, my jury is still out on what to believe. I know that I am shaping my kids' worldviews by everything I do (or don't!) say, but I am not comfortable advocating in one direction. And as it has been pointed out before, this is not a salvation issue. But it could be! Like I said before, if we tell our dc that Genesis is not true, then why should they believe that Jesus is the only way to salvation?

 

Instead, I have tried my best to explain that we really don't know for sure, because God is God, and we are not. We weren't there, and there is no way to prove what happened. We've talked about Genesis 1 and the fact that, because He is God, there's no reason to think that the world couldn't have been created in six days (24 hour days). But because that chapter is poetry, it may have been symbolic and pointing out that there is a Creator, and He created absolutely everything. We've also discussed the references in other parts of the Bible that suggest that God's "day" is not necessarily a 24-hour period, so maybe he created it in that way, but not in 144 hours. I approach it as a wonderful and fascinating mystery, because that's what the act of Creation was. Why do people only use this argument when talking about Genesis 1? The Bible says it's a day, the same word used for day elsewhere. Do people argue that Joshua actually marched around Jericho for 7000 years? Of course not! Then why the insistence to say that a day is not really a day in Genesis 1?

 

As for evolution (the "man descending from the apes" parts, not the observable fluctuations in populations part), we've discussed that God created man, but we don't know how he did it. The Bible is quite clear that God intentionally created man to be set apart from the animals and to bear His image, so I'm unrelenting on that point, but how is a different question. I do have a devoutly Catholic friend who is comfortable with the fact that, no matter at what point God placed His image in/upon man, it was at that point that man became man. Whether that was while his monkey cousins were swinging in trees or as a totally new and different created being in the Garden, bearing the Image of God is what sets men apart from the animals. I am becoming increasingly drawn to that position.The Bible actually does say how God created man- that He took dust from the earth and breathed life into him.

 

 

 

We as Christians need to stop trying to force the Bible to agree with the evolutionary "evidence". The Bible already tells us how it happened! AIG is a great resource for explaining the scientific evidence in light of the Bible. (Which is how we should do it. Don't try to explain the Bible in light of the scientific evidence. Science can make mistakes. The Bible is infallible and inerrant.)

[LisaKinVA]

 

We as Christians need to stop trying to force the Bible to agree with the evolutionary "evidence". The Bible already tells us how it happened! AIG is a great resource for explaining the scientific evidence in light of the Bible. (Which is how we should do it. Don't try to explain the Bible in light of the scientific evidence. Science can make mistakes. The Bible is infallible and inerrant.)

 

With regard to Genesis not being true... I haven't seen a single Christian say that Genesis isn't TRUE, what I (and others) have said is that we do not see a need to be LITERAL. The TRUTH is that God Created... where we disagree is that this also requires LITERAL interpretation of that truth, that a "day" is a literal 24-hour day. I do not believe the Hebrew word YOM supports that view in exclusivity based upon other uses of the word throughout scripture. You are comparing a LITERAL interpretation of one passage, which can legitimately (through Biblical and historical teachings of the passage) have multiple meanings with a very specific passage in which Jesus says, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father, except through me." One is not like the other. It's essentially like saying the use of parable and allegory in the Bible cannot be used to represent Truth, because the STORY itself is not LITERALLY true. The fact that something is literal or allegorical has no basis on whether the meaning expressed is true or false. Here is a link to AIC, which has some strong rebuttals to the YEC position.

 

If you are going to hold to this standard, we have no reason to read Fiction (and historically, that has been a widely-held Christian belief...that Fiction was "of the devil" because it wasn't 100% literally true...it was a frivolous exercise, and could hold no redeeming value. That reading fiction was essentially saying it was okay to lie.)

 

We as Christians need to stop trying to create divisions where divisions need not exist. When Science and our interpretation of the Bible disagree, one view must be wrong. Science isn't perfect, neither are man's interpretations of the Bible. We can point to numerous contemporary examples of Christian leaders who will simultaneously proclaim the infallibility of scripture, and summarily tell their flocks that huge swaths of scripture are not really "scripture" in order to support their interpretation of a single verse. Man is a fallen creature, who has a history of ignoring, misinterpreting, and using scripture to support their own pernicious ends.

[mytwomonkeys]

i am YE. i teach creation from a biblical viewpoint and not a scientific one. i unapologetically tell my children my views are faith based. they are very aware that some people consider my beliefs as being trapped in an intellectual cul de sac. it doesn't bother me. if my children come to other conclusions, they are welcome to do so. but i am comfortable with what i believe. we do use christian curriculum for science, but honestly, it doesn't try to prove the age of the earth. it discusses that god "created" but doesn't discuss "how". we are currently studying vertebrates in depth and animal classification. we will study evolution starting in middle school, but i don't see a need for it to be the main focus at ages 10 & 8. my kids are exposed to evolution and many things contrary to what we teach (not just 'religious' by any means, but life choices in general)... so we discuss things as they come up all of the time. at this point, it just doesn't require a curriculum.

[Professormom]

I understand this struggle. Different camps teach different theories and each uses different lingo, which is confusing in itself. For example, if you ask 15 people from different backgrounds to define evolution, you will probably get at least 7 different answers:tongue_smilie: Sometimes, a person will refer to evolution as big bang, no creator, coming from monkeys. While someone else will say that everything that isn't young earth qualifies as evolution. But, those two examples aren't even close to saying the same thing. So, it can be difficult to even have a calm discussion about the

 

Since AIG has already covered young earth Christian, I will just throw out Hugh Ross at Reasons to Believe as an old earth Christian viewpoint (for your reading enjoyment:-) I completely understand why you want to figure some of the stuff out now, while your child is young. As parents, we really are the first source for wisdom in our kids world. I felt (and still feel) a huge responsibility to know what I believe (in light of what we know at this point in time) and why and be able to discuss that intelligently with my kiddos.

 

Hope it helps!

[Omma]

The following is from my dh:

 

Some interesting evidence for young earth:

1) T. Rex bones not fossilized in Montana with components of blood still surviving. 65 million years ... I think not.

2) The forming of the Grand Canyon over millions of years lacks observable evidence. It reflects a more sudden event exemplified by the erosion which occurred at Mt. St. Helen.

3) Vertical fossilized trees do not reflect years of slow sedimentary layers (tops of trees would decay), but a quick event occurring in days/weeks.

 

I am not suggesting that there are not arguments on both sides. However, for me, creation has more than enough credibility to have my confidence.

 

This site has a compelling video series.

http://www.natureofcreation.org/about_us.htm

 

Todd

Edited September 1, 2012 by Omma

[Joshin]

Lastly, on a purely Scientific standpoint, there is not enough evidence for evolution. Evolution is a THEORY. And it has not been proven. There is also not enough evidence for me to accept it as fact, even aside from my Biblical concerns.

 

Please see my first post, re: theory. A scientific theory is not the same as the common theory so many think. This is misunderstanding affects many, if not most, people, not just those of a particular faith. A scientific theory is not less than a law, it is equal to a law.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Definitions_from_scientific_organizations

 

I am trained in the sciences. I went to university for it. The scientific method, which includes a thorough understanding of hypotheses, theory and fact, is elementary learning. A theory is no less than a scientific law.

 

Also, it's a common misconception that YEC and OE views are theories along with evolution. At this point in time, that just isn't true. None have passed the necessary peer review and evidence gathering to pass into theory. I know there is YEC and OE literature that says otherwise, but it is operating on the misconception of the definition of theory and law. This is not to say that one day these views won't be accepted as theory, but at this point they are not.

 

Regardless of whether you teach evolution or creationism, it is even more critical to fully understand and teach the scientific method and process. This is the fundamental basis for all scientific understanding. If no other science is ever taught again, every child (and adult) needs to at least understand this process.

[mytwomonkeys]

and really, the bible is filled with miracles that are literally impossible through the eyes of science. they absolutely cannot be proven or verified. in fact, if "tested" many events in the bible would be proven as completely false. i have read here several times people trying to explain miracles in a logical manner, but i find it all so unnecessary. for me, the creation story is the same way. i believe it occurred. i believe adam and eve were real people and not a figurative explanation. i believe the red sea was parted. a donkey spoke. jesus fed 5,000. he raised the dead. he healed the lame. he rose and conquered death. i also think there are times when the bible is allegorical. i just don't think the genesis creation story is one of those times. it isn't debate worthy for me though. in fact, IRL, i have never had a discussion about this outside of my own family. i take it by faith. i'm okay with that.

Edited September 1, 2012 by mytwomonkeys

[jar7709]

The following is from my dh:

 

Some interesting evidence for young earth:

1) T. Rex bones not fossilized in Montana with components of blood still surviving. 65 million years ... I think not.

2) The forming of the Grand Canyon over millions of years lacks observable evidence. It reflects a more sudden event exemplified by the erosion which occurred at Mt. St. Helen.

3) Vertical fossilized trees do not reflect years of slow sedimentary layers (tops of trees would decay), but a quick event occurring in days/weeks.

 

I am not suggesting that there are not arguments on both sides. However, for me, creation has more than enough credibility to have my confidence.

 

This site has a compelling video series.

http://www.natureofcreation.org/about_us.htm

 

 

Todd

 

Omma, none of your three points are evidence for YE. Interpretation of those items in favor of YE reflects lack of understanding of methodology and/or geologic setting. If you would like to debate, you can pm me, but it is unlikely anyone is changing anyone's mind, I suspect.

 

Sorry OP for going off topic a bit, this topic can get heated around here. I will bow out of this thread now so as to not make it worse.

[Mimm]

biologos.org is a good site from an old earth point of view if anyone is interested.

 

I thought this was interesting. In the Nye thread, there were comments that only a very small segment of the American population rejected evolution but according to this graphic... not so much.

[MrsBasil]

Omma, none of your three points are evidence for YE. Interpretation of those items in favor of YE reflects lack of understanding of methodology and/or geologic setting. If you would like to debate, you can pm me, but it is unlikely anyone is changing anyone's mind, I suspect.

 

Sorry OP for going off topic a bit, this topic can get heated around here. I will bow out of this thread now so as to not make it worse.

 

 

I wish you didn't have to, but I understand. Your responses are really interesting.

 

OP, I lean toward an old earth, evolution being true, and we don't know how God created the universe, but I think he gave us science to figure things while being in awe of His power.

 

I intend to teach evolution and an old earth in science class.

[serendipitous journey]

I am currently using MFW K for my dd, 5, and am going to be starting a dinosaur unit next week. I am conflicted about whether or not to read the book, What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs, which is scheduled for reading next week along with the unit.

 

I am a new Christian. I was raised Catholic, although we seldom attended Mass and I never made conformation, and didn't attend church again until about 2 years ago. We've been attending a non denominational Christian church for the last two years. I went to public school, all the way up through public university at the graduate school level. I have very limited information about the young earth / creationist view of science and was taught the standard evolution theory. I am by no means a science buff. I took only the required science classes to fullfill my general education requirements in college and took the classes which are typically taken by humanity and social sciences students.

 

So, here are my questions....

1) If you teach young earth view to your children, why....

2) If you do not, what view do you teach and why....

 

 

I teach old earth, and evolution. I believe that one of the largest dangers of the strong young earth beliefs, which hold that there is proof in our universe that the Genesis creation stories are historically true, is not the scientific error but the spiritual one: it puts God, and faith in God, into the realm of things that can be measured, weighed, and verified or falsified. In a word, it is essentially idolatrous. Consider that one common argument against evolution is the indignity of man being descended from apes. This argument has, at its heart, pride and a very constrained view of what is possible for God, and also a blind belief that humans know what God's original intentions were.

 

3) What resources would be a good way to learn more about young earth / old earth philosphies, or Christian evolution theory in an unbiased way so that I can think about what view I would teach in the future?

4) If you were raised with the secular view of evolution, how did you come to believe young earth theory?

5) If you have a strong background in science, is their enough evidence to make young earth theory a plausable theory?

.

I'd suggest this book by Isaac Asimov. And no, there is not scientific evidence sufficient for a young earth. The evidence for young earth centers on the use of the Bible as a historical and scientific document: if you remove the Bible from the equation, there is no young earth hypothesis. Scientists who claim to have discovered young earth evidence and THEN converted to Christianity are rarer than Gnostic Christians and, similarly, cannot be taken as representing scientific truth any more than you would look to Gnostics for an explanation of essential Christian teaching.

[Tidbits of Learning]

I was raised in private, Christian schools until high school. I was taught with both Abeka and Bob Jones through the 8th grade. We were taught all the theories as theories. Public high school was the same. It was all theories. I never heard the term young earth until I began to home school.

I do think that it will cause your child issues in a secular college if this is all that you teach your child. I have seen this in students coming out of private, Christian schools and home schoolers coming from a totally YE education. They struggle and feel that science courses are great places for religious debates over this issue. They are trying to defend their faith in science class and it does not go over well with professors. Unless your child is going to attend a religious college, then you will need to teach them the other theories.

No, I do not believe that there is enough scientific evidence to say that the earth is only a few thousand years old. I do not know that any of the other theories are any more correct either. My approach is to teach them as theories and not relate science to religion. Not everyone has this approach and you have to do what is right for your family and your child's future educational pursuits.

[WishboneDawn]

i am YE. i teach creation from a biblical viewpoint and not a scientific one. i unapologetically tell my children my views are faith based. they are very aware that some people consider my beliefs as being trapped in an intellectual cul de sac. it doesn't bother me. if my children come to other conclusions, they are welcome to do so. but i am comfortable with what i believe. we do use christian curriculum for science, but honestly, it doesn't try to prove the age of the earth. it discusses that god "created" but doesn't discuss "how". we are currently studying vertebrates in depth and animal classification. we will study evolution starting in middle school, but i don't see a need for it to be the main focus at ages 10 & 8. my kids are exposed to evolution and many things contrary to what we teach (not just 'religious' by any means, but life choices in general)... so we discuss things as they come up all of the time. at this point, it just doesn't require a curriculum.

 

From a science-loving, evolution-accepting woman, thank you, thank you, thank you! :)

 

I think that accepting creation as a matter of faith is a perfectly fine stance. Trying to reconcile it with science only twists both faith and science.

 

I respect your position.

[WishboneDawn]

And to the poster with the comment about a dinosaur being used for work- why does that seem so ridiculous? Just because the Bible doesn't specifically mention dinosaurs being used for work doesn't mean it couldn't happen. I don't know if it did or not, but I do believe that man and dinosaurs existed at the same time.

 

 

If you're coming from the perspective of looking to the Bible for guidence on this, there's no scripture they says humans domesticated dinosaurs.

 

If you're looking at this from a scientific perspective you've got to ask, "What would I expect to find if that were the case?" Well, you'd expect to find evidence that dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time, To date we have none. Some argue the validity of the evidence that puts humans and dinosaurs on the earth at seperate times perhaps but that's simply an argument against something, not evidence for something else.

 

You'd also expect to find some representations of them. We have cave paintings with beautiful pictures of horses and deer, important animals to early man. Nothing when it comes to dinosaurs.

 

You'd expect to find equipment used to yolks dinosaurs. We find other equipment and tools but nothing that has even hinted at us having domesticated dinosaurs.

 

To make a claim, you need support of some kind. To make extraordinary claims, like domesticated animals, you need extraordinary support. There is nothing. To have a picture of a domesticated dinosaur in a book is to have left science far behind and embraced fancy.

[abacus2]

If you're coming from the perspective of looking to the Bible for guidence on this, there's no scripture they says humans domesticated dinosaurs.

 

If you're looking at this from a scientific perspective you've got to ask, "What would I expect to find if that were the case?" Well, you'd expect to find evidence that dinosaurs and humans existed at the same time, To date we have none. Some argue the validity of the evidence that puts humans and dinosaurs on the earth at seperate times perhaps but that's simply an argument against something, not evidence for something else.

 

You'd also expect to find some representations of them. We have cave paintings with beautiful pictures of horses and deer, important animals to early man. Nothing when it comes to dinosaurs.

 

You'd expect to find equipment used to yolks dinosaurs. We find other equipment and tools but nothing that has even hinted at us having domesticated dinosaurs.

 

To make a claim, you need support of some kind. To make extraordinary claims, like domesticated animals, you need extraordinary support. There is nothing. To have a picture of a domesticated dinosaur in a book is to have left science far behind and embraced fancy.

 

:iagree:

 

There is no scientific or Biblical evidence for this. It is ridiculous and insults the credibility of serious scientists who see or are looking for evidence that agrees with a young earth interpretation of the Bible.