Quote:
Originally Posted by
sndbay
Tj3, you certain gave me some home work..
However I have done some research on the ideas of YEC.
First let me say that I would accept scripture in saying God has created us, and according to HIS measure, has gifted each of us to doctors, teachers, etc.. And that would include scientists. Because without science where would we be to aid by doctor's the sick. And I read nothing as to whether the YEC would accept this as fact or speculation.
I don't know what you are saying. No YEC that I know of would disagree with disagree. Indeed the YEC beliefs are based upon science. Maybe you don't know, but my background is scientific. I used to hold to belief in evolution, to the extent that I would defend using some of the same arguments not used againt my position. It was a combination of the facts from science and the facts from the Bible which convinced me. At first, I tried coming to a compromise position - theistic evolution, and found that to be the hardest position to defend. As I continued to research, I found that there was actually nothing in science which is contrary to the YEC position, and in fact there is much in the way of scientific findings which validated YEC positions.
The reason that many people seem to think that science and YEC are at odds, is that they look at the timeframes given as being proven facts. That is not true. They are conclusions based upon numerous assumptions combined with the findings. Minor changes in the assumptions can make dramatic changes in the timeframes.
the biggest issue that I have with some scientists, and this tends to be the died in the wool evolutionists, is that they do not separate fact from assumption, and tell us that they assumptions are fact. Fortunately there are a large number of scientists both secular and Christian who are willing to state what is and is not proven and what is and is not an assumption.
Quote:
Second would be that everything I have given in reference has included the scriptures, and has held confimed in a 6 day creation that follows by Genesis 1:5 in the 24 hour day known as night and morning was established. This sets the time clock of what we confirm today in our calendars.
But you have redefined heaven to try to re-set when the 6 days started and have re-interpreted Jeremiah by ignoring the fact that it specifically states that it is a prophetic pronouncement about Jerusalem.
Quote:
a.) So YECs are fundamentally opposed to any explanation for the origins of anything which replaces God as the universal creator as stated in the Bible. I have not done that, and would also be opposed that.
By definition, a creationist of any sort would agree.
Quote:
b.) Most YEC organizations reject the gap theory, and say it is unscriptural, unscientific, and not necessary, in its various forms. It is asserted that the entire universe is only thousands of years old. Well I am not sure whether this gap theory has speculated on all the scripture references that I have, but it does appear on the surface of being the same as what I noted by scripture. AND the speculation does certainly give allowance to science reasearch.
The point is that speculation is not fact and must be validated to be considered anything other than speculation. Speculation is not science. Speculation combined with observation may lead to an hypothesis which could be tested, and that would lead to a scientific finding. Now as for proving the history of the world by pure science, that is almost impossible by definition since not all factors can be tested, therefore assumptions will always exist.
However, if we combine scripture (using the one eyewitness that we have - God), we have the avility to look at the findings in a different way, and to modify the assumptions while staying within the realm of feasibility to see if we have a match.
Quote:
Third is the very idea that God does exist, and was, is, and always will be. At what point in age and time does the YEC give allowance to what was before the 6 day creation? The very existence of God, and what was more then just possibly, more then speculation, and very evident. Perhaps you can tell me? Is that not biblical or not necessary to the YEC?
Again, I am not clear on what your question is. As for what was before the 6 days, scripture tells us that it was nothing other than Him (the trinity), and as far as we can tell, the angels.
Quote:
Fourth is that most YECs today argue that Adam did not have a navel, the Omphalos hypothesis . It is purely speculation on my part, but I have always thought Adam would indeed have a navel just as we today. And the reference of cord of life would be with Eve and the female womb. And the silver cord within the flesh body that releases when our bodies die. Somehow my specualtion says the YEC as shown their Omphalos hypothesis as being unscriptural, unscientific, and not necessary.
This whole thing about a navel is a matter of speculation for certain and is not by any means something that adds to our knowledge of creation. I know no YECs who see such speculation as important and only rare ones who even have an interest in discussing it. It is not relevant.
