Evidence for and against young earth creationism.

[Brian Schuh]

When asked, why was there no rainbow before the end of Noah's flood, the orthodox answer is that God changed the laws of nature at that time. So if you assume uniformitarianism, one can "prove" the universe is so many trillions of years old. But considering that God created the laws of nature, He can change them at anytime. So considering that premise, one can assume uniformitarianism only back to the Flood.

One must prove that Noah's Flood could not have happened, before one could ever disprove Creation. I am waiting for some answers. Typical answers are that no ark could have carried all land dwelling vertebrates, or that fresh water fish could not have survived if the flood waters were salt water. I am surprised that those who don't believe in the Flood haven't stated the obvious objections.

 

[gnostic]

Doesn't the 40,000 year mark some quote here as the oldest evidence , tie in with Biblical calculations for the age of humanity? I thought it was pretty close

No.

If you were to calculate the time of the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, and count all the years, in reigns and generations, the timeline of the bible will only date the creation to less than 6000 years or 4000 BCE.

The bible timeline don't even come close to 40,000 years.

Why? Who are your sources for biblical timeline being 40,000 years?

Or did you make a mistake, adding one too many zero?

 

[Brian Schuh]

No.

If you were to calculate the time of the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, and count all the years, in reigns and generations, the timeline of the bible will only date the creation to less than 6000 years or 4000 BCE.

The bible timeline don't even come close to 40,000 years.

Why? Who are your sources for biblical timeline being 40,000 years?

Or did you make a mistake, adding one too many zero?

The Hebrew year count is 5777 years now since God created Adam and Eve. But that is if the fall of Jerusalem was in 421 BCE. Also the reigns of some of the kings of Israel and Judah overlapped as a father and son would sometimes reign at the same time. The Talmud says only a fool would doubt the Hebrew year count. So count me a fool, I have always doubted it. But for the record the count is 5777 years as of Rosh HaShanah this year.

 

[gnostic]

The Hebrew year count is 5777 years now since God created Adam and Eve. But that is if the fall of Jerusalem was in 421 BCE. Also the reigns of some of the kings of Israel and Judah overlapped as a father and son would sometimes reign at the same time. The Talmud says only a fool would doubt the Hebrew year count. So count me a fool, I have always doubted it. But for the record the count is 5777 years as of Rosh HaShanah this year.

Yes, I know.

5777 AM is the official date of the current Jewish calendar.

I had originally used 5766 as my basis, to calculate the timeline for Genesis, in 2006. But had recently changed it 5966 AM, because in my original calculations, the fall of Jerusalem was too late, because it would be too late for Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Yes, I know.

5777 AM is the official date of the current Jewish calendar.

I had originally used 5766 as my basis, to calculate the timeline for Genesis, in 2006. But had recently changed it 5966 AM, because in my original calculations, the fall of Jerusalem was too late, because it would be too late for Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus.

I would like to start a new thread on the points the Hebrew year count is in question. You sound like you could contribute to a thread like that. I have at least 2-3 points where the year count could be questioned. The important point is that the Moshiach must come by the year 6000. That's the deadline. So if the year count is too short, that means the Moshicah is closer than we thought. Let's start the thread, you ready?

 

[gnostic]

I would like to start a new thread on the points the Hebrew year count is in question. You sound like you could contribute to a thread like that. I have at least 2-3 points where the year count could be questioned. The important point is that the Moshiach must come by the year 6000. That's the deadline. So if the year count is too short, that means the Moshicah is closer than we thought. Let's start the thread, you ready?

I may not believe or worship in any deity, or follow any religion, but I am always interested in storytelling, myths and folklore, the history of scriptures. So I am willing to take part in such topic.

 

[SkepticThinker]

When asked, why was there no rainbow before the end of Noah's flood, the orthodox answer is that God changed the laws of nature at that time. So if you assume uniformitarianism, one can "prove" the universe is so many trillions of years old. But considering that God created the laws of nature, He can change them at anytime. So considering that premise, one can assume uniformitarianism only back to the Flood.

One must prove that Noah's Flood could not have happened, before one could ever disprove Creation. I am waiting for some answers. Typical answers are that no ark could have carried all land dwelling vertebrates, or that fresh water fish could not have survived if the flood waters were salt water. I am surprised that those who don't believe in the Flood haven't stated the obvious objections.

What evidence is there available to indicate that the laws of nature have been changed at any time, let alone by some god, let alone by the specific god you worship?

Nobody has to disprove Noah's flood. That is something that needs to be demonstrated. You don't get to just make claims without backing them up then demand that others disprove them.

 

[TheSecretAntitheist]

Okay. October 2nd at sundown, I begin to celebrate Rosh HaShanah. Humankind will be 5777 years old. 1656 years after Adam and Eve were created, the Flood happened. So 4121 years ago, the earth was destroyed by a Flood.

This is not an argument about creation versus evolution. This is an argument for and against a young earth. I opened up my mind a little and researched evidence of civilizations older than 4121 years, and even older than 5777 years.

I accept that a proper understanding of Genesis 1 doesn't preclude a lengthy period of time for creation. That the 6 days prior to Adam being created time didn't pass at the same rate it does now.

So what I'm saying is, produce for me evidence that can't be denied, that if there was a global flood, that it was significantly longer than 4121 years ago. Or produce for me evidence that can't be denied that civilizations existed prior to 5777 years ago.

Again, this is not an argument about evolution versus creation, but rather an argument about how old is human civilization.

**************

• 11,000 – 9,000 years ago: Byblos appears to have been settled during the PPNB period, approximately 8800 to 7000 BC. Neolithic remains of some buildings can be observed at the site.
• 10,000 – 8,000 years ago (8000 BC to 6000 BC): The Post Glacial Sea Level Rise decelerates, slowing the submersion of landmasses that had taken place over the previous 10,000 years.
• 10,000 – 9000 years ago (8000 BC to 7000 BC): In northern Mesopotamia, now northern Iraq, cultivation of barley and wheat begins. At first they are used for beer, gruel, and soup, eventually for bread. In early agriculture at this time, the planting stick is used, but it is replaced by a primitive plow in subsequent centuries. Around this time, a round stone tower, now preserved to about 8.5 meters high and 8.5 meters in diameter is built in Jericho.
• 9,500–5,900 years ago: Neolithic Subpluvial in North Africa. The Sahara desert region supports a savanna-like environment. Lake Chad is larger than the current Caspian Sea. An African culture develops across the current Sahel region.
• 9,500 years ago (7500 BC): Çatal Höyük urban settlement founded in Anatolia. Earliest supposed date for the domestication of the cat.
• 9,200 years ago: First human settlement in Amman, Jordan; 'Ain Ghazal Neolithic settlement was built spanning over an area of 15 hectares.
• 9,000 years ago (7000 BC): Jiahu culture began in China.
• 8,200–8,000 years ago: 8.2 kiloyear event: a sudden decrease of global temperatures, likely caused by the final collapse of the Laurentide ice sheet, which leads to drier conditions in East Africa and Mesopotamia.
• 8,000 years ago: Evidence of habitation at the current site of Aleppo dates to about c. 8,000 years ago, although excavations at Tell Qaramel, 25 kilometers north of the city show the area was inhabited about 13,000 years ago, Carbon-14 dating at Tell Ramad, on the outskirts of Damascus, suggests that the site may have been occupied since the second half of the seventh millennium BC, possibly around 6300 BC.However, evidence of settlement in the wider Barada basin dating back to 9000 BC exists.
• 7,500 years ago (5500 BC): Copper smelting in evidence in Pločnik and other locations.
• 7,200–6,000 years ago: 5200–4000 BC:Ghar Dalam phase on Malta. First farming settlements on the island.
• 7,000 years ago (5000 BC): late Neolithic civilizations, invention of the wheel and spread of proto-writing. The oldest golden treasure found in Varna Necropolis, Bulgaria.

 

[Brickjectivity]

The evidence against young earth creationism is the people who invest their lives finding out about natural history, such as the Anthropologists. Like anyone else they would not waste their time if they did not see reason in it. It would be like an army of chefs wanting to make bad tasting food.

 

[Reggie Miller]

The evidence against young earth creationism is the people who invest their lives finding out about natural history, such as the Anthropologists. Like anyone else they would not waste their time if they did not see reason in it. It would be like an army of chefs wanting to make bad tasting food.

It could be that anthropologists are seeking to get grant money so they can make a living. There is no grant money in young Earth creationism, since not many anthropologists accept it. So it could be that they do what they have to do to earn a living.

Anthropologists can't prove anything that supports macro-evolution, all they do is dig up bones and fossils and play their guessing games with them.

 

[Shad]

When asked, why was there no rainbow before the end of Noah's flood, the orthodox answer is that God changed the laws of nature at that time. So if you assume uniformitarianism, one can "prove" the universe is so many trillions of years old. But considering that God created the laws of nature, He can change them at anytime. So considering that premise, one can assume uniformitarianism only back to the Flood.

One must prove that Noah's Flood could not have happened, before one could ever disprove Creation. I am waiting for some answers. Typical answers are that no ark could have carried all land dwelling vertebrates, or that fresh water fish could not have survived if the flood waters were salt water. I am surprised that those who don't believe in the Flood haven't stated the obvious objections.

Your point is complete arbitrary as is your standard which stops right at the nonsensical story you just happen to believe

 

[Brickjectivity]

It could be that anthropologists are seeking to get grant money so they can make a living. There is no grant money in young Earth creationism, since not many anthropologists accept it. So it could be that they do what they have to do to earn a living.

Anthropologists can't prove anything that supports macro-evolution, all they do is dig up bones and fossils and play their guessing games with them.

Anthropologists aren't bank robbers. They work for a living.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Anthropologists aren't bank robbers. They work for a living.

Note that I didn't say they didn't work for a living. I did say they "could be" trying to pull the wool over our eyes, I did not say they are doing so.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Note that I didn't say they didn't work for a living. I did say they "could be" trying to pull the wool over our eyes, I did not say they are doing so.

We are talking about many people with mad skills that could be making money all sorts of other ways. They would not waste their time pursuing grants in a field that they did not believe in, so their occupation weights against young earth.

 

[Reggie Miller]

We are talking about many people with mad skills that could be making money all sorts of other ways. They would not waste their time pursuing grants in a field that they did not believe in, so their occupation weights against young earth.

Probably. But possibly not, with some of them.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Probably. But possibly not, with some of them.

True!

 

[Reggie Miller]

True!

Sorry that I caused you to misunderstand what I was trying to say.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Your point is complete arbitrary as is your standard which stops right at the nonsensical story you just happen to believe

How is that nonsensical? If God is the ultimate Law Giver, then how is it difficult to believe that He can change His own laws? Once you accept the fact that there is only one God. . . all truth follows from that.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Sorry that I caused you to misunderstand what I was trying to say.

"...Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check..."James 3:2 Not me!

 

[gnostic]

How is that nonsensical? If God is the ultimate Law Giver, then how is it difficult to believe that He can change His own laws? Once you accept the fact that there is only one God. . . all truth follows from that.

So god is fickle...?

...or is he a trickster or con-artist?

Either way, you are not painting good picture of God.