A friend was sharing about the challenge of sharing Christ with his highly educated. His brother is an Atheist and brought up objections as to the age of the Earth and human beings.I never did an in depth study of the pre-Adamite teaching. I do remember hearing about it years ago but never studied this theory enough to have a strong opinion either way.
or become dogmatic about it. Things to consider….1) The bible does not in any way teach the earth is only 6,000 years old.2) Young earth believers say that dinosaurs ran with intelligent man. However, there has never been a fossilized human skeleton found in the same ruins as any fossils we find today.3) The bible does allude to some time of creation before Adam in Ezekiel.4) You do not find too many animals today that are fossilized. It seems the fozzilized creatures such as the Wooley….saber tooth …..short horses were a prototype of what we have today.5) Science seems to suggest there were two floods. I kind of go with the gap theory between Gen 12. In verse 2, the Hebrew version states the earth became without form and void. Those last two terms are used in Ezekiel right after talking about cities and life. Those two terms also infer there was chaos. Which begs the question….does God create things initially in chaos.There are arguments of young earthers….1) There was no pre-adamite creation. God put those fossils there to test our faith.2) Dinosaurs died out because they were too big to enter the ark.3) Abraham ran with and rode on dinosaurs.Some old earthers say that each day with God was a billion years. I tend to believe the gap theory.Anyway, as someone who studies science and the bible, it seems that science and the bible do tend to parallel each other. God is the designer of both….why is it so hard to believe God can’t cause each to agree.
23I looked at the earth,and it was formless and empty;I looked to the heavens,and they had no light.24I looked at the mountains,and behold, they were quaking;all the hills were swaying.25I looked, and no man was left;all the birds of the air had fled.26I looked, and the fertile field was a desert.All its cities were torn downbefore the LORD,before His fierce anger.27For this is what the LORD says:“The whole land will be desolate,but I will not finish its destruction.28Therefore the earth will mournand the heavens above grow dark.I have spoken, I have planned,
The earth could be very old…but humans are not________________
I for one believe that there is enough proof in scripture that something was going on before Adam – I don’t know if it involved humans but it must have involved the ageless past …before time was created.Gen.1:1 is quite clear that in the beginning God created the heaven & the earth. No problem there, but how much time do you think went by before vs. 2-4 kicks in?In vs. 5 He cals the light day & the evening night & this is the first day.The 2nd item was the firmament & after that was finished God called it the 2nd day.I think we might have an issue with a clock because we think this was in the timespan of our 24 hour day but I don’t believe time had begun yet. In fact time isn’t mentioned until chapter 4 but I do believe that time began when God removed them from the garden.My point with all of this is that during the entire portion of the creation period & the use of the word day we are marginalizing the narrative to fit into our own understanding of days & nights & clocks that use 24 hours.What if the dinosaurs roamed for several thousand years between days 1-2 or maybe between days 1-5???Me doesn’t think that Adam had to battle a T-Rex or any of the sort________________Empty nest syndrome is for the birds!Email me at: [email protected] planters are focused on just one thing …introducing people to Jesus!
Most respectable bible scholars believe Adam was created as a man and not as a baby. It is therefore logical to deduce that the rest of Creation came into being with built in maturity (for lack of a better word). In other words, the Garden of Eden wasn’t simply rows of seeds. There were fully mature trees. It’s conceivable that rock formations could have been created in the same manner. Furthermore, we are not certain what impact the catastrophic flood of Noah’s day had on the entirety of the created universe.
1. Everything was created with the appearance of age.2. There cannot be an aging process without decay, there can no decay with death and there can no death without sin.3. The Pre-Adamite discussion is always made in an apologetic attempt to make the Bible line up with modern science. But Science is flawed. Even the Laws of Thermodynamics do not agree with each other.4. Heb 11:3
Re: No Pre-Adamite Race
3. The Pre-Adamite discussion is always made in an apologetic attempt to make the Bible line up with modern science. But Science is flawed. Even the Laws of Thermodynamics do not agree with each other.
I don’t believe there has been a comment using apologetics to discuss the OP but it does seem extraordinary to believe that Adam had to deal with a T-Rex or saber tooth tiger or a pterodactyl. A solid discussion could be made to investigate the curiosities & discoveries of a possible pre-Adam existence on this planet. There probably won’t be any solid proof of mankind but post Gen.1:1 & prior to the creation of Adam there had to be some dinos wondering around________________Empty nest syndrome is for the birds!Email me at: [email protected] planters are focused on just one thing …introducing people to Jesus!
Uncle, I agree….but these are the arguments they
give. I am a science major and one who is a student of the word both for around 30 years. Nobody really could give a straight answer on the dinosaur question. The fact that evolution didn’t get it right lead me to study more in depth. This drivel as you call it are actual arguments by young earthers. As mentioned before, the earth being old while mankind being young is what I see in the bible. I think science just confirms what the bible already says. In looking at the young earthers and their approach, they premised the bible states the earth is only 6,000 years old so they build their argument around it. Copernicus comes to mind. The religious community argued the earth was the center of the universe because the bible said so. Long story short Copernicus disagreed and since all the funding came from the religious community, well…he was defunded. Lets not forget the earth is flat because the bible says it has 4 corners…..Keep in mind, Lucifer was over some sort of kingdom that could very well included the earth and when he fell, all of the first creation fell with it. We do know he was over something here on earth and it didn’t happen during Adam or later. The OT and Jesus allude to it.Anyway, it really has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. At times I find it enjoyable to discuss and debate. But in the end, it really is a non-issue. I’m not a big Creation Museum advocate. But I I would like to go just to get an idea of the size of the ark.
Sorry Casey. You are wrong about young earthers. JD is right – you give out the silliest of straw men – and knock them over easily.I have never heard #2 Dinosaurs died out because they were too big to enter the ark.Most young earth creationists believe that dinosaurs WERE on the ark. As anyone knows – dinosaurs are reptiles. We know alligators are still alive – why not other reptiles?Reptiles continue growing throughout their life. All you do is bring in young reptiles. The conditions of earth after the flood led to the extinction of many reptiles and many other animals, as well________________
Sorry Casey. You are wrong about young earthers. JD is right – you give out the silliest of straw men – and knock them over easily.I have never heard #2 Dinosaurs died out because they were too big to enter the ark.Most young earth creationists believe that dinosaurs WERE on the ark. As anyone knows – dinosaurs are reptiles. We know alligators are still alive – why not other reptiles?Reptiles continue growing throughout their life. All you do is bring in young reptiles. The conditions of earth after the flood led to the extinction of many reptiles and many other animals, as well.
FWIW, I have heard this from young earth folks.I agree with this take from Casey: Anyway, it really has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. At times I find it enjoyable to discuss and debate. But in the end, it really is a non-issue.There are some issues related to creation that have significant gospel importance. A literal Adam is one of them IMO — this has significant gospel implications in light of Romans 5
FWIW, I have heard this from young earth folks.I agree with this take from Casey: Anyway, it really has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. At times I find it enjoyable to discuss and debate. But in the end, it really is a non-issue.There are some issues related to creation that have significant gospel importance. A literal Adam is one of them IMO — this has significant gospel implications in light of Romans 5. As far as the age of the earth, in my opinion, there is not much significance to it in the big scheme of things. It is interesting to think about and hopefully we will find out one day.
I’m not necessarily a young-earther (I actually believe in a gap between Genesis 1creation and Genesis 2). However there are some scientific questions posed by young earthers that I remember and are very intriguing (none of which are the straw-men given above). One is the magnetic field and its measurable and predictable degradation through time puts the max age of ANY life on earth (due to the strength of that field in the past), to be no more than a million or so years max. Another is a layer of strata that should have billions of fossils that has none (I can’t remember it off the top of my head since I don’t dabble in the field much), then there’s the dust on the moon, the lander pads for the Apollo mission were designed to land on a layer of dust several feet thick (from billions of years of cosmic dust settling there), yet there was only an inch or so (not sure this is great one, but its better than those given above). Then of course the fossil record should show a majority of fossils as in-between but instead, relatively few are claimed to be middle-stage evolution of modern species. I went to a creation museum in Glenrose, TX a few years ago, and there were hundreds of these given there, NONE of those simplistic/childish/flat-earther nonsense above were included in their displays or discussions. On the flip-side, I find the dogmatism of Answers in Genesis to be off-putting and self-defeating.edit – I think the point I’d make to a seeker who has questions about young earth theory is that for many, if not even most Christians, there is no agreement, much less a requirement to believe in a 10,000 year-old cosmos. I’d show him Genesis 1and diagram that creation story against Genesis 2
FWIW, I have heard this from young earth folks.I agree with this take from Casey: Anyway, it really has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. At times I find it enjoyable to discuss and debate. But in the end, it really is a non-issue.There are some issues related to creation that have significant gospel importance. A literal Adam is one of them IMO — this has significant gospel implications in light of Romans 5. As far as the age of the earth, in my opinion, there is not much significance to it in the big scheme of things. It is interesting to think about and hopefully we will find out one day. If you ask me what curriculum, I don’t know and likely my wife doesn’t remember. We’re talking about 15 years ago. Anyway, if people would do some basic research, they would see this belief is out there. I have done a lot of research in this area.I have a science degree and feel I can speak intelligently with anyone regarding creation.I can take any side in this debate and argue their best arguments for any side. I won’t stoop to thinking the other side are morons – just because I came to a different conclusion – because there simply is too much we don’t know.Lots of intelligent research and textbooks have been written regarding this subject.But to take the snake handlers textbook of creation isn’t really given the other side much of a fair shake.There are good arguments out there – for all sides – unfortunately we are doing a forensic search for answers – since no one is duplicating creation at this present time. Lots of theories – no conclusions________________
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is one of three Laws of Thermodynamics. The term thermodynamics comes from two root words: thermo, meaning heat, and dynamic, meaning power. Thus, the Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Heat Power. As far as we can tell, these Laws are absolute. All things in the observable universe are affected by and obey the Laws of Thermodynamics.The First Law of Thermodynamics, commonly known as the Law of Conservation of Matter, states that matter/energy cannot be created nor can it be destroyed. The quantity of matter/energy remains the same. It can change from solid to liquid to gas to plasma and back again, but the total amount of matter/energy in the universe remains constant.Second Law of Thermodynamics – Increased EntropyThe Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. How so? Usable energy is inevitably used for productivity, growth and repair. In the process, usable energy is converted into unusable energy. Thus, usable energy is irretrievably lost in the form of unusable energy.Entropy is defined as a measure of unusable energy within a closed or isolated system (the universe for example). As usable energy decreases and unusable energy increases, entropy increases. Entropy is also a gauge of randomness or chaos within a closed system. As usable energy is irretrievably lost, disorganization, randomness and chaos increase.Second Law of Thermodynamics – In the Beginning…The implications of the Second Law of Thermodynamics are considerable. The universe is constantly losing usable energy and never gaining. We logically conclude the universe is not eternal. The universe had a finite beginning — the moment at which it was at zero entropy (its most ordered possible state). Like a wind-up clock, the universe is winding down, as if at one point it was fully wound up and has been winding down ever since. The question is who wound up the clock?The theological implications are obvious. NASA Astronomer Robert Jastrow commented on these implications when he said, Theologians generally are delighted with the proof that the universe had a beginning, but astronomers are curiously upset. It turns out that the scientist behaves the way the rest of us do when our beliefs are in conflict with the evidence. (Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, 1978, p. 16.)
The post is an excellent example of why preachers should not dabble in science or attempt to prove the Bible scientifically. The distinction between usable energy and unusable energy does not create any sort of contradiction with the other laws.