A Question to Young Earth Creationists.....................

• You insist that one should believe in 6 day creation, and a 6000 year earth because you take the Bible literally and the Bible is the word of God, and that if you compromise that, then you run the risk of compromising other parts of the Bible. Well i have to ask, what about the accounts of the Bible that, if you were to take it literally, would imply that the Sun revolves around the earth? Ecclesiastes 1:5 "The sun still rises, and it still goes down, going wearily back to where it must start all over again Joshua 10:13 "The sun stood still and the moon did not move until the nation had conquered its enemies" In fact, when men like Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo showed that the Heliocentric model of the universe was correct, many people back then voiced skepticism, and used a literal interpretation of these passages in order. Martin Luther is quoted as saying on this subject_ "There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must . . . invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth". John Calvin also took a literal view of scripture, and criticized Copernicus saying "The heavens revolve daily, and, immense as is their fabric, and inconceivable the rapidity of their revolutions, we experience no concussion. ... By what means could it [the earth] maintain itself unmoved, while the heavens above are in constant rapid motion, did not its Divine Maker fix and establish it" Now, if you grew up with a geocentric world view, and lived in the 1500's i understand why you would think the way Calvin and Luther thought. But i have to ask, how is what your doing any different from what they did back then? They took a literal view of scripture to defend geocentricism, and rebut Heliocentrism, and today, many creationists take a literal view of scripture to deny descent through common ancestry and an old earth. I am a Christian, and i strongly believe in the Bible. But the idea that i have to think the earth is 6000 old in order to believe in Christ's saving grace is absurd. I think this quote sums up my view on this subject. "It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation"_St Augustine @Roger, who said he was lying? Genesis is just giving a literary construct of God creating the universe. It never was meant to be a scientific explanation. Thats the error of both Creationists and the New Atheists movement. The 7 days construct was used to show order and completion, because 7 in the Jewish lexicon represented completion.

• Answer:

  The Bible always refers to "oldness' as the age of the universe or age of the earth. That is a literal interpretation. Genealogies of people and the length of a day have nothing to do with the age of the earth. Exodus 20:11 would be the best case for saying humans are as old as the universe. But we were not made during those 6 days, so everything was not made in that period. Nothing that was alive is listed, so it may mean matter (non-living material). In Chapter one of Genesis the universe including earth is created before the 6 days. The 6 days assume the earth already exists. Genesis 1:2 says it is dark over the face of the earth, but the sun already exists so sunlight cannot get through what ever is surrounding the earth. The clouds clear on the 4th day, and the Sun can be seen from the face of the earth. The fossil record does not blend together by small changes so Darwinian evolution did not occur.