I am a young earth creationist is there any other people

When I was younger at university the belief in evolution really did damage to me
I did chemistry and physics and I was convinced from the scientific evidence regarding thing like genetics , cosmology and even fossil evidence to believe in a young earth as the only qualifications that Darwin had was a theology degree
As I am out in Portugal i can post several lines of evidence for young earth creationism

Dominic,

please let us not discuss on that topic. I do not believe in evolution, and do currently have a lot to do with science. But... whether the earth is young or old - I do not know, and it does not really bother me. Is it relevant for the salvation of our souls? - No! Then it is really not worth the effort. I know some people, who concerning faith have made shipwreck by discussing such questions. (1 Timothy 1:19)

"Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers." (2 Timothy 2:14)

There are really more important themes to be discussed and the one thing that unites us should be Christ, not young/ old earth belief!

Peace be unto you!

Agreed-

Why do you want to rehash this again Dom?

It's awesome that you are a YEC!

Meanwhile, check out this wonder of God's creation:

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/hubble-ngc-3256-06057.html

YEC is a great topic, Old earthers who have jettisoned the bible for today's Psuedo-science will throw a fit. Theistic evolutionists, Day-agers and numerous other poetry claimers cannot stomach the simple genesis account.

These all have an agenda Dom, its to preserve their pet theories which are linked to their own private interpretations of scripture. Its only a controversial topic because unbelief demands the bible bow to human philosophies. I say philosophies because science-proper does not offer the Christian false alternatives to biblical truth, only the philosophies embedded in their latest theories demand biblical Christians to bow to them.

Why should this topic be more controversial than the Deity of Christ? Or the Salvation by grace alone? Because to deny these will not give them a platform to deny the scripture in other areas. In short, they couldn't get access to this website.

To me, denial of Genesis is the same as denial of Salvation by grace. The difference being of course I have to make room for those Christians who are deceived while contending with those who are deceivers who have no loyalty to the word of God.

Dom, if you want to find a bee-hive of falsehoods, just sign up for some apologetics sites, these usually have plenty of old earthers and theistic evolutionists. At least there you will not have to sift through a dozen posts to sniff out the compromisers, there they just flatly state they have as strong a loyalty to their own theories and education as they claim to have to the bible.

Genesis deniers enter into the Christian camp just like the heretics seeking to enter today...Gay is the way, God made us like this, homosexuality is not a sin etc. The idea is to project their distorted understanding of human identity upon God and distort his identity, thereby undermining his claims to holiness, righteousness and justice. The idea is to gain these little inroads so that much larger and more damaging heresy can take root.

Ive heard it many a time, YEC is heretical, YEC is anti-science and other such non-sense, but at the end of the day, YEC has made a choice to take God at his word, the rest do not and no matter what they say and how hard they resist, that is exactly what they are doing.

Brother Blaine was always happy to die on the "prayer for he persecuted Church hill". Unfortunately you will find over and over again there are no hills worth dying on, no truths worth giving the appearance of being the mean-guy or the bad-guy.

Those who loose the faith over a debate on whether the word of God describes the creation of the earth were not saved to begin with. 'the sun came up and scorched them', leaving the faith over a debated issue doesnt even blip the persecution meter.

All these excuses to keep quiet, keep it all 'Jesus loves me Kum-by-ya' are what a devil would use to silence truth.

So, all you're going to get is a link to past debates calling you into question for bringing up this topic. When a topic like this is nay-nayed...thats exactly the topic I want to discuss; because behind it all and behind all the latent cowardice masquerading as 'peace among us' is unbelief, deceptions and lies that cannot keep their place if what is believed is challenged.

You might ask yourself Dom, what did you say in defense of YEC in the last thread that was completely refuted? I'd say nothing. In short what was put forth was not even challenged with any successful rebutal to YEC. So, bringing it back up only shows the weakness and insufficiency of old earth thinking as well as theistic evolution.

Folks will run from controversy because they think God is telling them to run from 'division and strife', but he's not, they are listening to themselves. My Brothers and sister are so afraid of looking bad, every truth is sacrificed on the altar of appearance.

Gloryandgrace wrote:

Why should this topic be more controversial than the Deity of Christ? Or the Salvation by grace alone? Because to deny these will not give them a platform to deny the scripture in other areas. In short, they couldn't get access to this website.

To me, denial of Genesis is the same as denial of Salvation by grace. The difference being of course I have to make room for those Christians who are deceived while contending with those who are deceivers who have no loyalty to the word of God.

Bro Marvin, you are preaching now sir! I confess that as an unlearned country boy I am ignorant to what the YEC/old earth conversation is all about but anybody that doesn't believe every part of the Bible as it is written is not saved and on their way to hell. The Same bible that tells Jesus is the Son of God is the same bible that gives the account of the creation. To deny one part is to deny all.

The Bible says Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God, not by scientific theories and opinions of man. This is the reason why there is such unbelief in the church and world because we have placed our faith in what man has to say over what the Bible says.

Off topic of YEC but I would like to add since you brought this up we now have unbelievers preaching in the pulpit that God no longer does miracles or that the gifts of the Holy Ghost are not available for today's church. They call it cessation, God calls it unbelief. The Bible says Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. With God shall nothing be impossible. The Apostle Peter said the gift of the Holy Ghost wasn't just for them but for all that the Lord did call.

How can one claim that God can still save a soul today, but cannot heal a body, or going a step further, preserve His perfect Word for this generation? A double minded man is unstable in all His ways. How can one claim to believe John 3:16 and not Genesis 1?

Thanks for that great Word brother, you spoke to me.

Elijah; you said.."How can one claim to believe John 3:16 and not Genesis 1?"

This is my conclusion as well, both are known by revelation, but Genesis has been attacked today and revelation for the believer is reportedly not sufficient, he needs scientific approvals and modern-mans validation. Because of this, Genesis 1 falls into poetry, myth and analogy. Why? Because Satan wants to get at John 3:16 with the same mindset and reduce it to poetry, myth and analogy. Man cannot be saved by poetry, but by the God who created man and sent his Son to redeem fallen men. A God who created the world and tells us about it, is the same God who sent his Son to be crucified and tells us about it.

The skeptic of Genesis 1 demands we differentiate between accounts, Satan now finding allies, moves in them to create doubt in the word of God...so that miracles, healings, Holy Spirit ministry can all be undone with the simple question "hath God said" to Genesis 1. If God does no miraculous work in Genesis, we undermine the idea of a miracle working God from the outset, all that remains is adding more skeptical questions to any other 'miracle' testimonies.

I have to say (this has been on my mind for some time), I believe satan is trying to cause division in this chatroom. I believe some people are legitimately seeking answers to questions or trying to gain new perspectives, but some people just want controversy, while other sincere believers are being used unwittingly (and if you don't believe that can happen, just look at Jesus rebuking Peter).

Please, please, I implore you, pray before you post anything. Don't just try to win an argument.

Trying to understand what you are saying brother Marvin...

here is a list of ministers who believed in the Gap creationism.

Religious proponents of the gap creationism have included Oral Roberts, Cyrus I. Scofield, Harry Rimmer, Jimmy Swaggart,[8] G. H. Pember, L. Allen Higley,[4] Arthur Pink, Peter Ruckman, Finis Jennings Dake, Chuck Missler, E. W. Bullinger, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Herbert W. Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong, Michael Pearl and Clarence Larkin.

Are you saying these ministers don't believe the whole bible or are not saved?

Just trying to understand...

Dominic,

Don't know if this will help you, but will share it...

Our oldest son graduated from MUW in the early nineties with a degree in microbiology. (He had professors that were evolutionist.) He is a creationist, believes in a young earth -and he would agree with you 100%. He came to this conclusion because of his studies in the physical, biological sciences that it proves the creation by God as recorded in Genesis.

God bless.

Sandra

Once again a person does not have to be a YEC to NOT believe in evolution. The leading Christian proponent of a billions of year old earth DOES NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION.

Automatically equating belief in an ancient earth with a belief in evolution is a RED HERRING and DISHONEST.

Obviously, atheistic scientists believe in an ancient universe AND evolution. They are simply wrong about the latter.

I am saying theistic evolution and old earth creationism are compromises to the Faith. Gap-creationism means what?
Are you referring to an alleged gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2? If so, even the literalists who believe that will not throw the remainder into "poetry" so as to allegorize the creation.

Ive read Pink on creation by way of his commentary on Genesis 1, I think Brother Pink is being influenced by the mounting interest during that time for evolution and was making a way for science ( as the thought ) was helping us understand Genesis 1. We have since found out we didn't need the evolutionists or old earthers to help us with Genesis 1.

Numerous other preachers were compromisers in other areas too. Dake, Bullinger, Armstrong (both of them cultists).

But, Pink goes farther than merely asserting the possibility of a gap between vs 1 and 2.

Brother banks, I am not saying it's my way or the highway, I am saying to endorse old earth, theistic evolution or some other frame theory is a compromise and twisting of the truth. Their salvation is not my call, but their doctrine is my call and I can judge it accordingly.

I don't count Genesis as a minor, I count it as a major. I consider a mistake here so dangerous and so errant those who have any kind of consistent theological understanding will find ways to compromise other areas of the faith to make room for their compromise in Genesis.

Now, there are plenty who compartmentalize everything. In short, they have no consistency to their theology so they are all over the map. Orthodox here, heterodox there, biblical here, heretical there. These folks are a walking contradiction theologically. In effect, they claim biblical inerrancy over here, but fail to actually teach it in authority when the right people are in the room.

These folks remind me of the prophets Jeremiah complained about. They don't feed the sheep with good grass and clean waters...they trample the grass and muddy the water. So it is with compromisers of Genesis 1.

To be an old-earther is to be "in-the-know" as far as a scientifically saavy preacher. They pretend their learning of various scientific theories gain them a good stand with the 'learned' of the day so when they recite these 'learned men', they acquire a notoriety from them and lots of applause from the unlearned audience. Chuck Missler does this very well. His teachings are packed full of present day scientific jargon and theory, but he has stepped away from the plain reading and revelation of Genesis 1.

A Gap in Genesis vs 1 and 2 are not much of an issue, its conjecture. But old earthers need it to get 14 billion years as a settled fact before they poetize Genesis 1.

//but anybody that doesn't believe every part of the Bible as it is written is not saved and on their way to hell.//

Elijah, not sure how old you are but surely you are not so naive as to make such a statement?

Surely you understand that great heroes of the faith see certain scriptures very differently?

Which ones are you consigning to eternal torment- only those who do not agree with you?

Thank goodness it is God, and not you, who decides the fate of men.

For any who may be interested in digging deeper into the earth, the best book on the subject, both scientifically and theologically would be, "Creation and Change: Revised and Updated" by Douglas Kelly.

It won't disappoint any who do take the time to read it!

When all is read and done, the one thing that really matters is that He may reveal Himself to you, and that you are drawn nearer to Him, and have a closer walk with Him.

For He is the God of Genesis to Revelation, Who has been and always will be. The Great God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Thanks Savannah: I have many books on this subject, but I don't have Dr. Kelly's I'll see about ordering it.

Hi Alec: I never took those who 'gap' Genesis Chapter 1 and 2 seriously. I had a good brother who wanted to write a book on the pre-adamic race. I told him flatly he didn't have any scripture to base it on, only conjecture and the necessary dismantling of a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.
The text of the scripture doesn't intimate it, but I do realize you can isogete until your hearts content on any subject, Genesis 1 is no exception. Over the years I have ran into numerous ones wondering why the seeming differences between Gen chapt 1 and Chapt 2, but it is quickly resolved with simple study.

To get the idea they are 'gapped' you need someone who has a private interpretation that can gain momentum by way of educational notoriety. "Well if Dr. so-and-so says it, it must be good as gold". With that little lie, we are well on our way to 'controversy' and 'debate' and 'scholarly research'...so now the non-scholar cant read Genesis 1 and expect to know what it means. He cannot know what Genesis 2 means either because various scholars have found some obscure text that they claim undoes the greater context contained in the plain reading.

After a time you realize what is being done to you, you are being swindled out of what God is saying and its being replaced with a clandestine entry of a new axiom...namely I need to depend upon man to help me know what God is saying.

When you see it, you cast it out like a devil and treat it as such.

I do the same with those who question the deity of Christ etc.