Creationism

Please report broken hyperlinks using the Reply option at the bottom of each page.

_

One of the authors of the latest and most potent of the space-time theorems, Alexander Vilenkin, wrote, ‘With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe.  There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.‘  What is that problem?  Space-time theorems imply that a Causal Agent must be present, and that this agent brought our universe of matter, energy, space, and time into existence [out of absolutely nothing].  Moreover, this Causal Agent matches the description and claimed mode of creation of the God of the Bible.

https://salvomag.com/article/salvo38/creation-event-horizon

and…

A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.  The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion beyond question.
Fred Hoyle (PhD, Astronomy, Cambridge), Engineering & Science (November 1981)

https://salvomag.com/article/salvo46/the-miracle-element

and…

Why physicists can’t avoid a creation event

https://www.scribd.com/doc/77980709/Why-Physicists-Can-t-Avoid-a-Creation-Event

[The irony of that article is, it was published in New Scientist, an overtly  anti-creationist  journal.  Also available  here .]

———————

When geologists unequivocally dismissed the idea of a global flood and recognized Earth’s antiquity, many conservative theologians acknowledged that there was more to the past than literally spelled out in Genesis, the opening chapter[s] of the Bible.  But some Christians — those we now call [young-Earth] creationists [or YECs] — rejected this perspective and chose to see geology as a threat to their faith.  In so doing, they abandoned faith in reason and cast off a long-standing theological tradition that rocks don’t lie.”

http://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/22/11/pdf/i1052-5173-22-11-4.pdf

[ASND would like to remind the Geological Society of America (if they would actually listen) that  many   scientists  who also happen to be creationists believe that the  most   literal  possible (i.e. author-intended)  interpretation  of Genesis actually fits a very old Earth and universe much better than it does a young Earth and universe.]

———————

Creation Ex Nihilo: Science vs. The Bible

Does Genesis 1 Conflict with Science?

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/day-age.html

and…

Early Earth Atmosphere Affirms the Bible’s Account of Creation

https://salvomag.com/article/salvo47/seeing-stars

and…

Were They Real?  The Scientific Case for Adam and Eve

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2010/10/01/were-they-real-the-scientific-case-for-adam-and-eve

and…

Biochemistry Supports Long Life Spans Described In Genesis

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2007/01/17/biochemistry-supports-bible-s-long-life-spans

———————

The Age of the Earth (& Universe):  What Does  The Bible Teach?

Historic Age Debate: Overview

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/tnrtb/read/tnrtb/2007/10/10/historic-age-debate-overview-part-1-%28of-2%29
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/tnrtb/read/tnrtb/2007/10/17/historic-age-debate-overview-part-2-%28of-2%29

and…

YECs  almost universally claim that all  OECs  believe Genesis 1 is poetic, parabolic, or prophetic (or some other form of figurative) literature — anything other than historical narrative.  That claim by YECs is patently and provably false.

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/04/15/old-earth-creationism-on-trial

and…

In the debate over the age of the Earth, selecting the right [i.e. the most accurate, literal (i.e. author-intended)] translation makes a big difference…  [For example] Genesis 1:16 does not require the Sun, Moon, and stars to be formed on the fourth day; they could, in fact, have been created as far back as ‘in the beginning’ (Genesis 1:1)… [and] those who wish to truly understand Genesis 1 must overcome cultural barriers that separate modern perspective from ancient thought…  For example, the [Hebrew] doesn’t have separate words for ‘son,’ ‘grandson,’ ‘great-grandson,’ and ‘descendent.’  All of these English terms are covered by the Hebrew word ben.  Similarly, ab means ‘father,’ but also ‘grandfather’ and even ‘ancestor.’  God refers to Abraham as Jacob’s ‘father’ (ab) in Genesis 28:13, when of course, he is Jacob’s grandfather.  In English, this would be considered an error, but it is perfectly accurate and literal in Hebrew grammar.  Hebrew genealogical terms are well suited for communicating ancestry, but, unlike English, remain ambiguous about the number of generations spanned.  Consequently, Hebrew genealogies are typically telescoped (shortened by leaving out less important individuals)…  The genealogy of Moses, which appears four separate times in Scripture (Exodus 6:16-20, Numbers 26:57-59; and 1 Chronicles 6:1-3; 23:6, 12-13), provides an excellent example of telescoping… [but] we can use other Bible passages to demonstrate that at least six names were likely skipped between Amram and Moses.  Despite the biblical evidence, some [YECs] continue to [fail] try[ing] to explain away this gap…  Many [YECs] assume that [the obviously abridged biblical genealogies] can be used to build an exact chronology from Adam to Abraham… [but those] attempts to use [the various,  sometimes contradictory , biblical genealogies] to date the age of the Earth to around 6,000 years old are critically flawed…  For those [YECs] who [choose] to [believe] these calculations anyways there is yet another problem – the ages given in the  Septuagint  [used by the translators of the old King James Version] differ from those in the original Hebrew.  It seems [according to scholars cited in this article that the ages of historical figures reported in the Genesis genealogies] were altered [by the ancient Jewish translators of the Septuagint] to make the gradual decrease in life spans smoother…  At the center of controversy over the days of creation is the ‘evening-morning-day‘ phrase, which appears six times in Genesis 1.  The KJV renders it,And the evening and the morning were the Xth day.‘  This interpretation actually misrepresents the original Hebrew in multiple ways and in each case lends artificial support for a calendar-day view.  First, the verb ‘was‘ appears twice in the Hebrew, but the KJV [omits] the second occurrence and so reduces it to a simple sentence…  Second, the KJV reads ‘the first day‘ for Genesis 1:5, whereas the Hebrew actually reads ‘one day‘ or ‘day one‘ instead.  Third, the KJV adds the definite article ‘the‘ before ‘day‘ even though it is not present in the Hebrew…  Adding ‘the’ makes the reading easier in English, but it implies that it is talking about a specific period of time (i.e., a solar day) rather than representing time generically.  Given the dominance of the KJV for the last several centuries, this mistranslation has played a major role in popularizing the calendar-day interpretation [of Genesis 1-3] among English speakers…  [Clearly, then,] much of the controversy and confusion over [the] Genesis [creation dates] stems from the fact that theologians – going all of the way back to the earliest days of the church – have relied on Old Testament translations rather than the original Hebrew.

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/tnrtb/read/tnrtb/2009/06/19/historic-age-debate-dependence-on-translations-part-1-%28of-5%29
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/06/26/historic-age-debate-dependence-on-translations-part-2-%28of-5%29
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/07/03/historic-age-debate-dependence-on-translations-part-3-%28of-5%29
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/07/10/historic-age-debate-dependence-on-translations-part-4-%28of-5%29
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/07/17/historic-age-debate-dependence-on-translations-part-5-%28of-5%29

… &

From Noah to Abraham to Moses: Evidence of Genealogical Gaps in Mosaic Literature

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2012/07/23/from-noah-to-abraham-to-moses-evidence-of-genealogical-gaps-in-mosaic-literature-part-1
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2012/07/26/from-noah-to-abraham-to-moses-evidence-of-genealogical-gaps-in-genesis-part-2
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2012/07/30/from-noah-to-abraham-to-moses-evidence-of-genealogical-gaps-in-mosaic-literature-part-3
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2012/08/02/from-noah-to-abraham-to-moses-evidence-of-genealogical-gaps-in-mosaic-literature-part-4
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2012/08/06/from-noah-to-abraham-to-moses-evidence-of-genealogical-gaps-in-mosaic-literature-part-5

… &

The Biblical Genealogies Revisited: Further Evidence of Gaps

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2013/11/19/biblical-genealogies-revisited-further-evidence-of-gaps

… &

The Tower of Babel Confirms Genealogical Gaps in Genesis 11

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/voices/read/voices/2018/02/09/does-the-tower-of-babel-confirm-genealogical-gaps-in-genesis-11

… &

No-gap proponents [of the biblical genealogies] note that a particular hiphil form of [the Hebrew verb] yalad [‘begat’] is used in Genesis 5 and 11 and cite this particular form as proof of no [geneaological] gaps…  Yet if all uses of yalad in the hiphil in the Bible are analyzed, it is clear that most of them lack a descriptive narrative to clarify a precise [father-son] relationship…  Clearly the large majority of instances of yalad in the hiphil in non-Mosaic literature are unknown or figurative… [These] data suggest that there probably are gaps [in the Genesis 5 & 11 genealogies].”

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/voices/read/voices/2018/03/27/does-y%C4%81lad-in-the-hiphil-prove-there-are-no-gaps-in-genesis-5-and-11-genealogies

… &

The Genesis Genealogies [An extensive, scholarly examination of the facts.]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/reasonstobelieve/files/articles/The-Genesis-Genealogies.pdf

and…

YECs believe that if the Earth is very old then God must be lying to us in the Bible.
Why that is false, on multiple levels.

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/rtb-101/read/rtb-101/2011/01/29/young-earth-issues-is-god-lying

and…

Biblical Creation: Resolving the YEC vs. OEC Conflict Biblically [cf. 1Th 5:21]

http://godandscience.org/apologetics/creation.html

and…

The Sixth Creation Day: Biblical Support for Old-Earth Creationism

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2014/02/19/the-sixth-creation-day-biblical-support-for-old-earth-creationism

and…

Animal Death Before the Fall: What Does the Bible Say?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/animal-death-before-the-fall-what-does-the-bible-say

… &

Of Weevils and Wasps: God’s Good Purpose in Animal Death

http://www.reasons.org/articles/of-weevils-and-wasps-gods-good-purpose-in-animal-death

… &

Was Evil Present in God’s “Very Good” World?

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/10/30/was-evil-present-in-god’s-very-good-world

… &

Peril in Paradise: Theology, Science and the Age of the Earth

http://www.reasons.org/articles/peril-in-paradise-theology-science-and-the-age-of-the-earth

and…

Radiometric Dating – A Christian Perspective

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2002/01/01/radiometric-dating-a-christian-perspective

… &

The low levels of carbon-14 detected in fossils and geological specimens by YECs actually argue against a young Earth, not an old Earth.

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/the-cells-design/read/the-cells-design/2017/04/19/does-radiocarbon-dating-prove-a-young-earth-a-response-to-vernon-r.-cupps

… &

Responses to the YEC “RATE” Project Critical of  Radiometric Dating

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2009/04/22/helium-diffusion-in-zircon-a-response-to-questions-by-the-rate-team

and…

Young-Earth vs. Old-Earth Debate [Video]
Dr. Hugh Ross & Dr. Walter Kaiser vs Dr. Jason Lisle & Mr. Ken Ham

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/rtb-101/read/rtb-101/2012/09/22/the-john-ankerberg-debate-young-earth-vs-old-earth

[Transcripts below.]

https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-1/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-2/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-3/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-4/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-5/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-6/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-7/
&
https://www.jashow.org/articles/the-great-debate-on-science-and-the-bible-program-8/

… &

Young-Earth vs. Old-Earth Debate
Dr. Hugh Ross (Ph.D., Astronomy) vs. Kent Hovind (Ph.D., Education)

 

Nobody Important  was reading through a Facebook blog and came across this question:

Is the book of Genesis (particularly the story of Adam and Eve) historical or allegorical?

ASND is happy to answer that question with a series of essays, beginning at the Beginning and passing though — and then beyond — Adam and Eve.

and…

How Long Was Creation Day Six?

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2014/02/24/how-long-was-creation-day-six

… &

The Nature and Duration of Creation Day Six

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/rtb-101/read/rtb-101/2007/12/04/the-nature-and-duration-of-creation-day-six
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2014/02/24/how-long-was-creation-day-six

and…

The Biblical Creation Timeline

http://www.reasons.org/articles/creation-timeline

and…

“Having started with the assumption that evolution is true, these researchers conclude that evolution is true and that a literal Adam and Eve cannot be true.”

http://www.reasons.org/articles/assumptions-circular-reasoning-and-a-literal-adam-and-eve

[ Circular  reasoning  is the  very  foundation  of  evolutionary  “research” .]

… &

Adam and Eve: An Actual Primordial Pair or an Allegorical “Population”?

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/the-cells-design/read/the-cells-design/2016/07/06/adam-and-eve-a-primordial-pair-or-a-population

… &

When Did the Genetic Adam and Eve Live?

https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/rtb-101/read/rtb-101/2013/04/04/rtb-101-post-9-age-of-adam
&
https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2013/08/16/update-when-did-the-genetic-adam-and-eve-live

… &

Speaking of Adam and Eve: Study of Languages Supports Biblical Account of Human Origins

http://www.reasons.org/articles/speaking-of-adam-and-eve-study-of-languages-supports-biblical-account-of-human-origins

and…

“The mere assertion that humans could live more than 900 years — as  Genesis 5:5  states [about Adam] — seems, for many people, nothing short of absurdity…  [but r]ecent advances in the biochemistry of aging provide answers to these seemingly intractable problems…  These discoveries point to a number of possible ways that God could have allowed long life spans and then altered human life expectancy –– simply by ‘tweaking’ human biochemistry.  The recent progress of research in the biochemistry of aging, along with the cosmic radiation caused by the Vela supernova eruption, make the long life spans of Genesis 5 and the decrease of human life spans at the time of the Flood scientifically plausible.”

http://www.reasons.org/articles/long-life-spans-adam-lived-930-years-and-then-he-died

[You’re welcome.]

————————

Young Earth Creationism:

The Texas Dinosaur/”Human Footprints” Controversy
This web site provides a collection of articles reviewing the history of the Paluxy controversy and evidence involved, including several articles on other alleged anachronistic fossils and artifacts.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html

[Much more can be featured in this section if requested in the Reply section below.]

——————–

 

Want to Leave a Reply?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s