Discussions and Arguments of Old Earth vs Young Earth Creationism

I. Acceptance of Creation is growing in spite of overwhelming evidence proving Evolution There is no easy resolution for whats true and evolution or creationism. It is a complex topic with profound scientific, religious, educational, and criticism. How can a student or parent come to grips with this issue? Evolution vs. Creationism provides a badly needed, comprehensive, and balanced introduction to the many facets of the current debates about what should be taught in a classroom or in reality itself. Evolution relies on scientific facts while creationism clings on biblical beliefs. But the legal and

The age of the earth has been debated for centuries. Many people believe in evolution that it took billions of years for everything and everyone to form. Others believe that God created the earth in seven days and that the earth is young. Secular scientist and Christian scientist both use different methods for determining how old the earth is. For example, Secular scientist look and use the layers of rocks to help them, while Christian scientist uses the Bible and look at historical data from other cultures to help them. Doesn't looking at archeological data seem more accurate than looking at rocks? If the earth is truly billions of years old, then why is there little sediment on the sea floor? Or how can secular scientist explain finding soft tissue in a fossil if the earth is old? The most logical explanation is that the earth is young. Many people believe something just because people say that it is true, sometimes it is good to investigate for yourself and see if it is good for you.

The Masoretic text translated gives exact same number of Generations of Genesis. The Septuagint number varies. Both Old and New Earth agree with some facts that observes present nature of Rocks. They differ with the un-observed past and the facts viewed from history. Scientist tries to use historical reconstruction of the universe and they also use data research and analysis of empirical science. Our text book says “Historical reconstruction, however legitimate, is a totally different enterprise”.

Mainstream science make predictions based on varies tests. For instance, one of the test said that in a certain geological eras some animals should have transitioned from fish to amphibians. This helped the scientists find just such fossils in that era. Old-Earth seculars believe “tree rings over 6000 years old, thick layers of limestone, and the sequence of animal fossils in rock layers” are evidence for an Old-Earth view.

The theory that I’m going to defend in this paper is Young Earth Creationism. Young Earth Creationism or YEC is the religious belief that the universe, Earth and all life were all created by direct acts of God less than 10000 years ago. Young-earth creationist believe that the creation days were six 24 hours days. “They believe that about 2,300–3,300 years before Christ, the surface of the earth was rearranged by Noah’s Flood. All land animals and birds not in Noah’s Ark perished, many of which were subsequently buried in the Flood sediments. Therefore, creationists believe that the global, catastrophic Flood was responsible for most of the rock layers and fossils.” (Anwseringenesis.org) Young Earth Creationist believe in Microevolution and

Old earth, or progressive creationism shares similarities with theistic evolution in that it places the age of the earth at 4-5 billion years ago and the universe at 10-20 billion years ago. However, they are not satisfied with the claim that God-guided evolution brought the world into existence, eventually arriving at the world we live in today. Robert C. Newman, an astrophysicist and New Testament professor acknowledges that it would be possible for God to use evolution as a creation tool, just as it is possible that God created solely through supernatural means. However, he thinks that there are too many unanswered questions left for both positions.

Throughout history, science has always faced challenges from outside groups who work to mold science to their beliefs, ignoring evidence and commonly held facts. Following in the legacy of the flat world and an Earth centered Universe, young Earth creationists bend science to fit their explanations of the Earth’s origin and timeline. Evidence for the ancient age of the Earth is present in every discipline of Earth science and directly refutes claims made by young Earth creationists. It is important to examine these claims and rebut them, as their denial of proper scientific understanding hampers progress and has wider implications for the future of our society.

The subject of origins, or how we got here, is one of the most fundamental questions that can be asked. The important question of why we are here can’t be answered by science alone. How we answer these questions provides the basis for how we think about things, it defines our world-view. The Evolution vs. Creation debate is often referred to as the Great Debate. 20th century science has made the compelling discovery that, at some point, the universe began. Both sides of the debate Evolutionists and Creationists agree on one thing only, that the universe has not always existed. This is where their agreement ends. The why and how the universe began is where the division and dispute begins.

The old-Earth evolution and young-Earth creation debate has been one that has gone on for centuries. Each viewpoint seeks to give an answer to life’s most difficult questions or origins and how the Earth came to be what it resembles today. While the Young Earth viewpoint has remained constant and unchanged throughout the centuries the Old Earth view seems to be continually evolving as new discoveries tend to discredit previous assumptions. One certainty is that both viewpoints take a dogmatic stance against each other in regards to the interpretation of scientific evidence. The purpose of this paper is to compare old-Earth and

Young earth creationism is what most people mean when referring to “creationism.” This is primarily due to the fact that the creationists most visible in the public eye during the creation-evolution debate were most likely to hold young earth creationist views. Additionally, the terms “recent earth” or “recent creation” have been used to refer to this same position. These terms clearly define their position as one in which the creation of the world occurred somewhat recently, that is, the world is young. However, it obviously doesn 't provide us with much information beyond that. To begin with, how young is the world? In order to help answer this and other questions concerning young earth creationism, biologist and philosopher of science

The debate about the age of the Earth has persisted for centuries! Some scientists try to disprove Christians and some Christians try to disprove scientific evidence. Nevertheless, there is a surprising number of Christians and scientists who have worked together to give their opinion about the age of the Earth by using both Biblical and scientific facts. The purpose of this essay is to succinctly describe both Old Earth and Young Earth viewpoints. My opinion about the matter will follow, in which I will provide Biblical evidence to support my claims.

Then we come to “The mixing of evolution and theology sometimes results in a theory called theistic evolution. The theory posits that through the process of evolution, God gradually developed life forms until finally they became human beings.” (Zinke, 2014) Theistic evolution is the proposition that God is in charge of the biological process. That God instructs the revealing of life and matter over a time span of millions of years.

Evolution has been debated for many years. Most scientists assume evolution to be true, but it is not officially proven. Evolution is known as “fact and theory,” because it is a fact that organisms have changed over time, but the mechanism that changes those organisms is uncertain. One of the major debates regarding evolution is the belief in creationism. Creationists believe that the Universe and organisms on Earth were all created by a divine power. There are also some theories in which creationism and evolution coexist. One idea is that the divine being who created the world used evolution as a method. Another idea is that science and religion are actually the same thing and religion explains the unknown parts of science. For example, science says that the world couldn’t have been created in seven days, but one of God’s days may not be the same length

It is for this reason that the debate is also not between science and Christianity. Each advocate for each position is attempting to reconcile the apparent differences between science and Christianity. It is simply the case that they each take a different approach and give different amounts of authority to science and a literal interpretation of Genesis.

For decades the age of the Earth has been a major conflict between science and religion, but why is it such a big conflict? If, in the year AD 1600, an individual had asked an educated European how old the planet Earth was and to recount its history, the response would have been that it was about 6000 years old and that its ancient history was given by the biblical account in Genesis (Changing Views of the History of the Earth). If one asked the same question of an educated European in AD 1900, one would have received a totally different answer (Changing Views of the History of the Earth). The answer would have been the Earth was ancient, there had not been a Noachian flood, and that the species of life had not been fixed over the history of Earth (Changing Views of the History of the Earth). In short, Genesis was an allegory and not literal history (Changing Views of the History of the Earth). This brings up the different views between “young earth creationists” and “old earth creationists” and those that support an infinite universe. The problem today is each side contains major valid points of evidence of both biblical and scientific, on the age of the planet Earth.