Ken Ham .vs. Bill Nye (Solomon, prophets, Abraham, Adam and Eve)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fossilization is a rare or relatively rare event and requires certain conditions to occur. Here are a couple of non-Christian sites regarding fossilization.
However, Genesis 6:20 says - Of the birds after their kind, and of the animals after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive.
God brought the animals to Noah.
Why are Kangaroos found only in Australia? Because Australia is geologically isolated from the rest of the world. So how did they get to Australia from the Ark? In the same way that they were brought to the ark. By means of God. A person who can think only in naturalistic terms, who does not believe in God, or does not believe in the supernatural or in miracles will not understand or accept this however.
The debate addressed the issue of the age of the earth. I am not, and never have been a young earth creationist. The Bible does not teach that the earth is only a few thousand years old. While the events in Genesis 1:2b and following took place in six literal 24 hour days, these events do not speak of the original creation of the heavens and the earth which is mentioned in Genesis 1:1.
I hold to the ruin-restoration gap view. These two sites address that. Since the first site may be a King James only site, I will state that I am not a King James only advocate. I simply post it because it concerns the ruin-restoration view of which I am speaking. One need not be a King James only advocate to accept the ruin-restoration gap view.
This thread, and my post (post #5) is four years old. I'm an old earth creationist but I no longer hold to the ruin restoration view.
I also believe the flood, while massive, was a local flood, perhaps based on the Black Sea flood, but that the author of Genesis used language of exaggeration to shape his theological point. The geology just doesn't support a global flood.
It is sad what some people choose to do with huge piles of money, knowing how much suffering there is in the world.
It is not sad. It was financed, and since it is a museum, it will eventually pay itself back.
04-21-2018, 05:12 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
This thread, and my post (post #5) is four years old. I'm an old earth creationist but I no longer hold to the ruin restoration view.
I also believe the flood, while massive, was a local flood, perhaps based on the Black Sea flood, but that the author of Genesis used language of exaggeration to shape his theological point. The geology just doesn't support a global flood.
After seeing this thread revived I was going to ask you if you still believed in the ruin restoration view. I am guessing that this change was influenced by Heiser?
After seeing this thread revived I was going to ask you if you still believed in the ruin restoration view. I am guessing that this change was influenced by Heiser?
Actually, the main reason is that geology doesn't support it. The ruin-restoration view, as I learned it had the earth being originally created in a state of perfection. But as a result of Satan's rebellion the earth became a wreck and a ruin. God turned out the lights and encased the earth in ice making the earth a dark and dead planet until around six or ten or so thousand years ago when God restored the earth in the six days of creation which Genesis 1:2b and following describe. But there is no geologic record of the earth becoming a dead place. Sure there is the snowball earth hypothesis ''first proposed by American geobiologist J.L. Kirschvink suggesting that Earth’s oceans and land surfaces were covered by ice from the poles to the Equator during at least two extreme cooling events between 2.4 billion and 580 million years ago.'' - https://www.britannica.com/science/S...rth-hypothesis. But that doesn't fit the GAP or ruin-restoration view of creation. There was never a time when the earth was devoid of all life. And then there is the sun, moon and stars being created on the fourth creation/restoration day which just doesn't make any sense. In light of the evidence I just couldn't hold on to a belief that didn't line up with that evidence, so I discarded the ruin-restoration view.
However, Heiser, as well as others such as Peter Enns, John N. Oswalt, John D. Currid, and John Walton, as well as reading books such as 'Myths from Mesopotamia, Creation, the Flood, Gilgamish, and Others' , translated by Stephanie Dalley, and 'Stories from Ancient Canaan' edited and translated by Michael D. Coogan and Mark S. Smith have done a lot to shape my current views concerning how the Bible should be understood.
Last edited by Michael Way; 04-21-2018 at 05:58 PM..
04-21-2018, 06:10 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
Actually, the main reason is that geology doesn't support it. The ruin-restoration view, as I learned it had the earth being originally created in a state of perfection. But as a result of Satan's rebellion the earth became a wreck and a ruin. God turned out the lights and encased the earth in ice making the earth a dark and dead planet until around six or ten or so thousand years ago when God restored the earth in the six days of creation which Genesis 1:2b and following describe. But there is no geologic record of the earth becoming a dead place. Sure there is the snowball earth hypothesis ''first proposed by American geobiologist J.L. Kirschvink suggesting that Earth’s oceans and land surfaces were covered by ice from the poles to the Equator during at least two extreme cooling events between 2.4 billion and 580 million years ago.'' - https://www.britannica.com/science/S...rth-hypothesis. But that doesn't fit the GAP or ruin-restoration view of creation. There was never a time when the earth was devoid of all life. And then there is the sun, moon and stars being created on the fourth creation/restoration day which just doesn't make any sense. In light of the evidence I just couldn't hold on to a belief that didn't line up with that evidence, so I discarded the ruin-restoration view.
However, Heiser, as well as others such as Peter Enns, John N. Oswalt, John D. Currid, and John Walton, as well as reading books such as 'Myths from Mesopotamia, Creation, the Flood, Gilgamish, and Others' , translated by Stephanie Dalley, and 'Stories from Ancient Canaan' edited and translated by Michael D. Coogan and Mark S. Smith have done a lot to shape my current views concerning how the Bible should be understood.
Mark Smith was also a big influence on me particularly this work:
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000.
This is a thread about Ken Ham vs. Bill Nye and their debate.
It is not a thread about the science of evolution, which (as you all know) is generally not an appropriate topic for the Religion and Spirituality forums. The reason it is not appropriate is that all of the misunderstandings cause the threads to veer completely away from their original topics, usually with myriads of incorrect information. The deleted posts even included a citation from the Creation Science Institute, a site full of misinformation, which leads to extensive posts unrelated to Religion or Spirituality.
This is a thread about Ken Ham vs. Bill Nye and their debate.
It is not a thread about the science of evolution, which (as you all know) is generally not an appropriate topic for the Religion and Spirituality forums. The reason it is not appropriate is that all of the misunderstandings cause the threads to veer completely away from their original topics, usually with myriads of incorrect information. The deleted posts even included a citation from the Creation Science Institute, a site full of misinformation, which leads to extensive posts unrelated to Religion or Spirituality.
I understand your position and you do not wish chaoes to enter the board. But part of the Nye and Ham’s differences is creation versus evolution. Flat earth claims is also not part of Christianity. Tying it to some very confused people who say they are Christian is just a way to make it part of this board.
The bible strongly states that man was created as an image and did not mutate. Are you ok with the topic of Intelligent Design?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
