Creation

[apothanein kerdos]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

"Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site." Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

None of them are legitimate scientists.

[Believers Battlecry]

Must be nice to just copy and paste, and not have to actually engage in discussion and think for yourself.

Why do you believe that the earth is much older than 6,000 years old?

[Kabowd]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

"Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site." Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

None of them are legitimate scientists.

lol...it's like when people post "Dr. Dino" as a source. He's as much a doctor as Dr. Pepper.

[Believers Battlecry]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

"Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site." Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

None of them are legitimate scientists.

Is this just your opinion? Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

[Kabowd]

Must be nice to just copy and paste, and not have to actually engage in discussion and think for yourself.

Why do you believe that the earth is much older than 6,000 years old?

Science?

For one, we have record of civilizations dating much farther than 6,000 years. (Chinese for instance)

[apothanein kerdos]

Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site.

Likewise, I can point you to thousands of people who speak Hebrew who will tell you that Genesis 1 shouldn't be taken ultra literally.

"Answers in Genesis really isn't a reliable site." Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

None of them are legitimate scientists.

Is this just your opinion? Please back this up with some evidence. Thank you.

Go look at their site. Ken Ham is their main guy. The guy has a bachelor's degree in applied science, with an emphasis on environmental science. The two doctorates he holds are both honorary, and non-scientific.

Compare this to proponents of the ID movement who almost all hold doctorates in scientific (or scientific related) fields.

[apothanein kerdos]

Also, where do you get 6,000 years from? That's not Biblical. Francis Schaeffer was a literal 6 day creationists, but he also believed it occurred more than 40,000 years ago.

[GeneV]

I believe in a literal Genesis account of Creation...it took God six 24 hour days. Just want to see what other Christians believe.

I believe in the inerrancy of Scripture but I also think that there are certain mysteries which the Almighty has not revealed clearly. Therefore if the Bible says it I believe it and if the six days etc actually means six billion or million or whatever, who cares, He still created all things including us

[Kabowd]

I believe in a literal Genesis account of Creation...it took God six 24 hour days. Just want to see what other Christians believe.

I believe in the inerrancy of Scripture but I also think that there are certain mysteries which the Almighty has not revealed clearly. Therefore if the Bible says it I believe it and if the six days etc actually means six billion or million or whatever, who cares, He still created all things including us

Yay for grace!

[Kabowd]

What is amazing is that you have a book that clearly defines what we consider one whole day " morning, evening" and we totally reject that it could remotely be possibly, maybe be 24 hours like what we know now, but we will take a "man-made theory" of one million years, WOW that takes faith. I guess I will stick to the Book that has been around the longest. When you throw out the Genesis account of Creation you undermine the rest of the Bible. Like it or not!

Honestly, I've never understood why some believers use the interpretation of "day" in the creation account as a litmus test for fellow believers. It's like, if you don't believe in 6, 24 hour days then you must not believe any of the bible. This is absurd, and frankly graceless. There are numerous well-educated, believing scholars on both sides of this debate. So obviously, there is enough ambiguity to allow for some grace. Just because someone holds a different interpretation of "day" does not mean they disregard or "undermine" the totality of Scripture. Instead of using this as a reference for judgment, we should appreciate that we at least agree that all things were created by God, and God alone.

Believer's Battlecry, did you agree/disagree with this post or just ignore it? I was just curious because topics like these can tend to get ugly real fast if each side doesn't allow for some grace when it comes to interpretting the word "day".