Author Topic: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)  (Read 3233 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mrclose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2256
  • Reputation: +164/-39
Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« on: March 26, 2014, 05:48:08 PM »
I keep coming across two debates in many forums that atheists use to 'prove' that the scriptures are a myth!

One is Noah's Ark and it's inability to contain all of the animal life that the ark was said to have held.

The other is the Young Earth debate and how it conflicts with scientific evidence.

I have studied these two issues and how scripture actually lays out what I as a Christian believe is the truth.

First .. The young earth debate:

The young earther's seem to believe in an earth that is only around six thousand years old and I believe founded on a faulty misconception of the word (or length) of the biblical day as set forth in Genesis.


If you follow scripture you will read: "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth".

There is no reference (or time frame) as to when or how long before he created man that this happened.

The actual time though could be billions of years, we just don't know.
(It is however, the beginning.)

Scripture doesn't say how long each creative day is in Genesis Chapter 1 but only gives the order of creation.

Genesis Chapter 2 verse 4 describes all of the creative days as one day.

The seventh 'day' is described as God's day of rest.
(I take this to mean that God is not 'creating' at this time because .. I doubt that he is tired) 8)

Paul indicated that God was still in his day of rest when he referred to the earlier words of David (ps95: 7,8,11) and to Genesis 2:2 where David urged: "Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest".
(God's sabbath)

By Paul's time that day of rest was already thousands of years old.

My last reference as to a days length is at 2Pe 3:8 where Peter says: "one day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day".

I don't believe that Peter was saying God's day was actually a thousand years here, I think that he was indicating that God had no actual or true measurable length of time for him (God) as being a day .. and that God doesn't judge time as man does.
=====================

Now for the Ark controversy:

According to scripture the ark was 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high.

A conservative calculation for the cubit is around 17.5 inches while some scholars believe it to be closer to 56 centimeters or 22 inches.

This puts the arks size at around 437 feet long, 72 feet wide by 43 feet high.

(A length to width proportion of 6 to 1 which is still used by naval architects)

There were two floors which gave added support and three decks equaling around 96,000 square feet.

Now for the amount of capacity.

Besides Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives, living creatures, of every sort of flesh, two of each 'kind' were to be brought on board.
(male and female)

It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family 'kinds'- the horse and cow to mention only two.

With this thinking, some scientists have said that had there been 43 'kinds' of mammals, 74 'kinds' of birds and 10 'kinds' of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the number of species that we have today.

This is only speculation and seems restrictive since sources such as the Encyclopedia Americana indicates that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals.

However, over 60 percent of these are insects.

 Breaking the figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside of the ark.

5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises which would have also remained outside the ark.

Some scientists estimate that there are only about 290 species of land animals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats.

If you wish to do the mathematics you can see where the ark was large enough to handle the amount of 'species' that would carry on to today.
(I have a headache in just researching the scriptures and getting this overly long post ready for posting) :mad:

I know, some will say what about the dinosaurs but since that isn't mentioned in scripture .. my guess is that they didn't live during the time of Noah.


These are just my thoughts, simple as they may be and not all encompassing for sure but .. I do believe a lack of study is why I think the young earther's and ark deniers are wrong and why some Christians are losing what should be .. a winning argument.

Other Christians can probably add more than what I have said here because .. there is so much more!

I apologize if I have upset any of my friends on the forum.

(any spelling errors are strictly mine) :panic:
« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 05:55:58 PM by mrclose »
"When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.

It is the same when you are stupid."

~ Anonymous

Offline Dori

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7964
  • Reputation: +406/-39
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2014, 07:14:55 PM »
In Genesis, I think a lot of the bible stories had been passed down through the generations.  They were bound to have been changed in the retelling, the writing and all the different languages and  translations. 
 






 

 
“How fortunate for governments that the people     they administer don't think”  Adolph Hitler

Offline freedumb2003b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6053
  • Reputation: +821/-72
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2014, 07:24:05 PM »
I keep coming across two debates in many forums that atheists use to 'prove' that the scriptures are a myth!

One is Noah's Ark and it's inability to contain all of the animal life that the ark was said to have held.

The other is the Young Earth debate and how it conflicts with scientific evidence.

I have studied these two issues and how scripture actually lays out what I as a Christian believe is the truth.

First .. The young earth debate:

The young earther's seem to believe in an earth that is only around six thousand years old and I believe founded on a faulty misconception of the word (or length) of the biblical day as set forth in Genesis.


If you follow scripture you will read: "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth".

There is no reference (or time frame) as to when or how long before he created man that this happened.

The actual time though could be billions of years, we just don't know.
(It is however, the beginning.)

Scripture doesn't say how long each creative day is in Genesis Chapter 1 but only gives the order of creation.

Genesis Chapter 2 verse 4 describes all of the creative days as one day.

The seventh 'day' is described as God's day of rest.
(I take this to mean that God is not 'creating' at this time because .. I doubt that he is tired) 8)

Paul indicated that God was still in his day of rest when he referred to the earlier words of David (ps95: 7,8,11) and to Genesis 2:2 where David urged: "Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest".
(God's sabbath)

By Paul's time that day of rest was already thousands of years old.

My last reference as to a days length is at 2Pe 3:8 where Peter says: "one day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day".

I don't believe that Peter was saying God's day was actually a thousand years here, I think that he was indicating that God had no actual or true measurable length of time for him (God) as being a day .. and that God doesn't judge time as man does.
=====================

Now for the Ark controversy:

According to scripture the ark was 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high.

A conservative calculation for the cubit is around 17.5 inches while some scholars believe it to be closer to 56 centimeters or 22 inches.

This puts the arks size at around 437 feet long, 72 feet wide by 43 feet high.

(A length to width proportion of 6 to 1 which is still used by naval architects)

There were two floors which gave added support and three decks equaling around 96,000 square feet.

Now for the amount of capacity.

Besides Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives, living creatures, of every sort of flesh, two of each 'kind' were to be brought on board.
(male and female)

It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family 'kinds'- the horse and cow to mention only two.

With this thinking, some scientists have said that had there been 43 'kinds' of mammals, 74 'kinds' of birds and 10 'kinds' of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the number of species that we have today.

This is only speculation and seems restrictive since sources such as the Encyclopedia Americana indicates that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals.

However, over 60 percent of these are insects.

 Breaking the figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside of the ark.

5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises which would have also remained outside the ark.

Some scientists estimate that there are only about 290 species of land animals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats.

If you wish to do the mathematics you can see where the ark was large enough to handle the amount of 'species' that would carry on to today.
(I have a headache in just researching the scriptures and getting this overly long post ready for posting) :mad:

I know, some will say what about the dinosaurs but since that isn't mentioned in scripture .. my guess is that they didn't live during the time of Noah.


These are just my thoughts, simple as they may be and not all encompassing for sure but .. I do believe a lack of study is why I think the young earther's and ark deniers are wrong and why some Christians are losing what should be .. a winning argument.

Other Christians can probably add more than what I have said here because .. there is so much more!

I apologize if I have upset any of my friends on the forum.

(any spelling errors are strictly mine) :panic:

You are so far behind the curve it isn't even funny.

These are the lightweight arguments. You don't even bring up the original term used: Yom. This has many possible interpretations, the only one agreed upon is "a period of time."

Of course, "kind" has not taxonomic context and is basically at best an external observation.

And I haven't even sharpened my pencil yet.  

I am one of the few survivors of TOS' Crevo Wars.

This doesn't even pop the balloon.

But it is an OK try by a layperson.

Read a few hundred science books and come back when you can understand why stochasticism is the antidote to random drift arguments and why abiogenesis enters not at all into the discussion.
Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with an ax

Hello to the Baizuo lurkers from DU, DI, JPR and Huffpo

DUmmies can no more understand the "Cave" than a rat can understand a thunderbolt, but they fear it just the same. Fear the "Cave", DUmmies. Fear it well. Big Dog 12-Jan-2015

Proud charter member of the Death Squad Hate Force! https://conservativecave.com/home/index.php?topic=112331.msg1386168#msg1386168

Ted Kennedy is the only person with an actual confirmed kill in the war on women.

Offline freedumb2003b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6053
  • Reputation: +821/-72
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2014, 07:29:25 PM »
Quote
The young earther's seem to believe in an earth that is only around six thousand years old and I believe founded on a faulty misconception of the word (or length) of the biblical day as set forth in Genesis.

You are wrong about the basis for this as well.  In Numbers begats are repeated backwards to Adam.  Even given a 900 year timespan for Adam, you end up +/- 6000 years.  This is repeated by Jesus in Luke 3:23-38 as well as in Matthew 1:1-17.

If you want to defend against someone, you need to understand the basis of their argument.
Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with an ax

Hello to the Baizuo lurkers from DU, DI, JPR and Huffpo

DUmmies can no more understand the "Cave" than a rat can understand a thunderbolt, but they fear it just the same. Fear the "Cave", DUmmies. Fear it well. Big Dog 12-Jan-2015

Proud charter member of the Death Squad Hate Force! https://conservativecave.com/home/index.php?topic=112331.msg1386168#msg1386168

Ted Kennedy is the only person with an actual confirmed kill in the war on women.

Offline FlaGator

  • Another Pilgrim
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Reputation: +925/-31
  • Democracy can survive anything except Democrats
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2014, 07:45:56 PM »
I believe in pretty much a literal interpretation of the Bible. With that said I agree that the Bible does not define what a day is before man was created to calculate the length of a day. 2 Peter 3:8 says "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. " I see no reason why God couldn't use micro-evolution as a mechanism for creating all the animal types and their various kinds. On the other hand He is God and nothing prevents him from creating everything in 6 24 hours periods. Christ said that with God all things are possible.

The young Earthers do ask some interesting questions like how can Haley's comet orbit the sun every 76 years and somehow managed not to use up all it's gaseous material? If it has been orbiting for the last 500,000 years (I just made that up of the top of my head. No one knows how long it as been orbiting) it would have completed 6578 orbits. How does it have any material left. There are other interesting situations that lend support to the Young Earth theory.

On the other hand there is a lot of evidence that the Earth is 5 billion years old. So which is right? I don't know. I really enjoy science and physics in particular so I tend to accept the old earth view. However, I also believe that Satan is a real entity and Christ calls him a liar and the father of lies. Perhaps because of his influence we are misinterpreting the data relating to old earth. Maybe we are misinterpreting the young earth data. At any rate it works to his benefit because those who should be opposed to him are fighting with each other about how long a day is when they should be standing firm against him.

I believe that Paul referred to these things as disputable matters. Whether I accept old earth or young earth my opinion has no effect on my salvation. If I believe in old earth and when I get to Heaven and find out I was wrong then cool, I was wrong. The only facts that matters to my salvation is that I believe that God created the heaven and the earth and that man because of his pride fell from grace and doomed mankind to be slaves to sin. I believe that my sins are what nailed Christ to the cross and He willingly died to save me by suffering in my stead. When I came to the cross road of my life all that I had to decide was would I accept that Jesus had paid the price for my sinful behavior or would I insist on paying it myself. My answer was and is "Thank you Jesus my life is yours"


« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 07:48:59 PM by FlaGator »
"My enemy's enemy is the enemy I kill last."
Klingon Proverb.

Offline freedumb2003b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6053
  • Reputation: +821/-72
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2014, 08:42:36 PM »
I believe in pretty much a literal interpretation of the Bible. With that said I agree that the Bible does not define what a day is before man was created to calculate the length of a day. 2 Peter 3:8 says "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. " I see no reason why God couldn't use micro-evolution as a mechanism for creating all the animal types and their various kinds. On the other hand He is God and nothing prevents him from creating everything in 6 24 hours periods. Christ said that with God all things are possible.

That is the traditional and understandable compromise view.  When you read Genesis in the original Aramaic it makes more sense.

Quote
The young Earthers do ask some interesting questions like how can Haley's comet orbit the sun every 76 years and somehow managed not to use up all it's gaseous material? If it has been orbiting for the last 500,000 years (I just made that up of the top of my head. No one knows how long it as been orbiting) it would have completed 6578 orbits. How does it have any material left.

Would it be that easy.  The simple physics behind a comet and its fiery coma is well known to anyone with the smallest understanding of cosmology or geology.  The comet does not "burn" like a napkin. And it probably won't last long.

Quote
There are other interesting situations that lend support to the Young Earth theory.

Name two.

Quote
On the other hand there is a lot of evidence that the Earth is 5 billion years old. So which is right? I don't know. I really enjoy science and physics in particular so I tend to accept the old earth view. However, I also believe that Satan is a real entity and Christ calls him a liar and the father of lies. Perhaps because of his influence we are misinterpreting the data relating to old earth. Maybe we are misinterpreting the young earth data. At any rate it works to his benefit because those who should be opposed to him are fighting with each other about how long a day is when they should be standing firm against him.

So medicine should just give way to alchemy?

Quote
I believe that Paul referred to these things as disputable matters.
Quote

Where?

Quote
Whether I accept old earth or young earth my opinion has no effect on my salvation. If I believe in old earth and when I get to Heaven and find out I was wrong then cool, I was wrong. The only facts that matters to my salvation is that I believe that God created the heaven and the earth and that man because of his pride fell from grace and doomed mankind to be slaves to sin. I believe that my sins are what nailed Christ to the cross and He willingly died to save me by suffering in my stead. When I came to the cross road of my life all that I had to decide was would I accept that Jesus had paid the price for my sinful behavior or would I insist on paying it myself. My answer was and is "Thank you Jesus my life is yours"[/quote


Allowing ignorance to stand in stead of knowledge is quite important.

You are of course correct in accepting Christ as the Truth is the first step.  Seeing the rest of the Universe God created as a rational place with rules to be understood and unveiled is the next step.

 
Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with an ax

Hello to the Baizuo lurkers from DU, DI, JPR and Huffpo

DUmmies can no more understand the "Cave" than a rat can understand a thunderbolt, but they fear it just the same. Fear the "Cave", DUmmies. Fear it well. Big Dog 12-Jan-2015

Proud charter member of the Death Squad Hate Force! https://conservativecave.com/home/index.php?topic=112331.msg1386168#msg1386168

Ted Kennedy is the only person with an actual confirmed kill in the war on women.

Offline FlaGator

  • Another Pilgrim
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Reputation: +925/-31
  • Democracy can survive anything except Democrats
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2014, 09:57:19 PM »
That is the traditional and understandable compromise view.  When you read Genesis in the original Aramaic it makes more sense.

The Old Testament is written predominately in old Hebrew and not Aramaic. The last half of Daniel is in Aramaic and the Apocrypha that is found in Catholic Bibles is in Aramaic. The three synoptic Gospels were probably written in Aramaic but there are no copies that exists. All that we have are Greek translations. Paul's epistles were in Greek. Aramaic is a semetic language derived from the common Hebrew language but it is not Biblical Hebrew.

Quote
Would it be that easy.  The simple physics behind a comet and its fiery coma is well known to anyone with the smallest understanding of cosmology or geology.  The comet does not "burn" like a napkin. And it probably won't last long.

I never said that a comet burned. I said use up all it gaseous material The material remains frozen until the comet nears the sun and then the heat from the sun thaws out the ice and it escapes as gas and reflects the sun giving the comet its glowing tail.

Quote
Name two.
Uranium-236 and Thorium-230 rations on the moon and carbon-14 levels in diamonds. Nothing conclusive but interesting. At any rate I accept the old earth view of things. My wife is a young earther but I love her anyways.

Quote
So medicine should just give way to alchemy?
I don't believe I implied that. If something works then it works. The theories of Quantum Physics have produced much of the electronic gadgetry we now accept as normal. No one knows really knows why quantum science works it is just accepted that it does. Is Quantum Physics magic or a supernatural force. I don't think so, I believe that we just don't understand it. Lacking understanding does not prevent its use and that is in no way related to alchemy. For the record alchemy eventually became chemistry.


Quote
Allowing ignorance to stand in stead of knowledge is quite important.
I'm really not up for a discussion on epistemology.

Quote
You are of course correct in accepting Christ as the Truth is the first step.  Seeing the rest of the Universe God created as a rational place with rules to be understood and unveiled is the next step.

I'll end with this from 1 Corinthians 3:18-20. It is a biblical way of saying everything may not be as it seems.

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness";
and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."

"My enemy's enemy is the enemy I kill last."
Klingon Proverb.

Offline mrclose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2256
  • Reputation: +164/-39
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2014, 10:05:51 PM »
You are wrong about the basis for this as well.  In Numbers begats are repeated backwards to Adam.  Even given a 900 year timespan for Adam, you end up +/- 6000 years.  This is repeated by Jesus in Luke 3:23-38 as well as in Matthew 1:1-17.

If you want to defend against someone, you need to understand the basis of their argument.


Well, I didn't intend this to be a scholarly, in depth study.

And I didn't intend for it to be the last word.

And I sure didn't want to sound like I was an expert who had all of the answers.

It was just me .. putting some thoughts out there for discussion. :mad: :tongue:
"When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.

It is the same when you are stupid."

~ Anonymous

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23048
  • Reputation: +2232/-269
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: Two debates, One post (young earth, the ark)
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2014, 08:14:51 AM »
The first question is:

Do you have all the information on the subject or only what was revealed?

Revelation implies some things may remain hidden.

You don't know what you don't know.


Second question:

Does it matter?

Suppose the universe is 13 billion years old and the Earth is 6 billion years old and humanity has roamed around for a couple dozen million years.

So?

That does absolutely no violence to the Genesis account. It changes nothing about the sacrifice and resurrection. That pretty much covers everything.

People spend far too much time trying to squeeze The Omni-Present between the covers of a book.

Gather your family. Read your Bible. Look through a telescope. Have a beer. The rest will sort itself out.
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."