The Da Vinci Code

[BM]

Here's a couple and I can't remember the exact numbers but - X amount of dust collects on the moon's surface every year (scientific fact). If the earth and planets were as old as evolutionists say, when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the moon he would have sunken to his knees in dust yet his measured footprint was only like one inch or so. The Earths rotation also increases in speed every year (scientific fact) yet if the earth were as old as they say it would actually be spinning so fast right now that it would over power the laws of gravity and evertything, trees, people, etc. would have been flung off into space yet this is not the case. If you take the current speed of the earths rotation divided by the average amount it increases per year it dates the earth at approximately the same age as the bible does yet evolutionists can't explain this.

Just food for thought

[kite]

That's assuming that those measurments have remained constant since the beginning. It also assumes that the moon dust hasn't setteled or been pounded by impacts. The undisputable evidence for the age of the Earth is too vast to cover on this or any board in serious detail. For anyone interested in evangelical scientific apologetics, try the Reasons to Believe web site. They have tons of info.

[JohnnyB]

Originally posted by kite
When I say that we know from science, I mean that we know by observation what types of environments planets have at various points in their lifespan. The only time that a planet's environment is hospitable enough to support life is at it's "middle age". I have no doubt that God could have done this in an instant, but I also have no doubt that he didn't. God's "day" is I'm sure in no way the same measurement as our 24 hour day.
Your siting of Sola Scriptura isn't really accurate. Didn't God in fact give us science, reason and intellect? The problem with Sola Scriptura is that it doesn't allow for Traditions passed down even by Christ himself (do this in remembrance of me). Some of the other passages that support this are 2Thessalonians 2:15, 3:6 and 1Corinthians 11:2. Not to mention that the early Church did not even have a New Testament to go by, they only had Hebrew texts known now as the Old Testament and Tradition.

Bro God give us science through the Scriptures, not through scientist.

What traditions from Christ?

The only ones I see are in the Scriptures. Ture early letters written to the early church were verbally or written words from people who walked with Christ, but we don't have the luxury in our time, but you did get that from Scripture

No one is saying science is the devil but I am saying science is slanted to evolution not creation and for us as believers in the Creator to let science slant our view of creation, isn't the best idea.

Genesis 1:3-5 "Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

This sounds plan enough to me that it's talking about a 24 hour period.

How do evening, morning, day and night fit in to the day age theory or at what point did God change these to a 24 hour period?

JohnnyB

[JohnnyB]

Originally posted by LARGE&INCHARGE
Here's a couple and I can't remember the exact numbers but - X amount of dust collects on the moon's surface every year (scientific fact). If the earth and planets were as old as evolutionists say, when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the moon he would have sunken to his knees in dust yet his measured footprint was only like one inch or so. The Earths rotation also increases in speed every year (scientific fact) yet if the earth were as old as they say it would actually be spinning so fast right now that it would over power the laws of gravity and evertything, trees, people, etc. would have been flung off into space yet this is not the case. If you take the current speed of the earths rotation divided by the average amount it increases per year it dates the earth at approximately the same age as the bible does yet evolutionists can't explain this.

Just food for thought

Good point, that's why the landing pads on the lem were over sized because thier theory was wrong but did the anounce that the idea of the universe being millions or billions of years old was wrong, no.

JohnnyB

[kite]

That doesn't mean that the word day has a universal meaning. Unfortunately we are at the mercy of the translators. One problem here is that Scripture also tells us that Jesus will call His angels from the 4 corners of the earth. There obviously is an error here. Surely none of us believe that the earth is flat.

[JohnnyB]

That statement is a figure of speech, it doesn't imply that the earth is flat, but I think you already knew that.

We have manuscript eveidence that what we have as Scripture is in it's original form. I agree that there can be some lose of meaning when translating but the over all message is there. Plus if we want to dive deeper we can go to the original manuscripts. The dead sea scrools proved that.

When you say we are at the mercy of translators, you are also implying that God isn't powerful enough to keep His word intact, which He is. There have been translation that we know have false translations in them, like the watchtower's translation.

Here's a good site for a young earth http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/

JohnnyB

[JohnnyB]

I went to the site you mentioned. I've read Huge Ross before and didn't agree with him on this issue.

The word study on Gensis chapter 1 is interesting, he has day referenced to #19 YOWM: sunrise to sunset; sunset to sunset; a space of time (defined by an associated term); an age; time or period (without any reference to solar days)

He leaves it at that, the first 2 meanings would be a 24 hour period, the last meaning might be applied if the addition of evening and morning weren't added to the scripture. Which he has as #22 and 23 respctively

22. EREB: the beginning of darkness; dusk, twilight, or nightfall; closing, ending or completion

23. BOCER: the breaking forth of light; dawn, daybreak or morning; dawning, beginning, or origin

With the addition of those to the scripture, it seems very clear to me that it is talking about a 24 hour day, not an age of time. If it's an age of time then when did God change this to a 24 hour period as we know it today?

But the most interesting part is the 3rd meaning "a space of time (defined by an associated term)" the associated term(s) are night, morning and evening, defining this to mean a 24 hour period.

We don't conform to modern science, we confrom to scripture and scripture alone.

Don't get me wrong the word day can be use for a period of time but it wouldn't be in the same sentance with the discription of a 24 hour day. The addition of night, day, morning and evening make it very clear what it's talking about. God is a law giver and there are laws or rules of gramatics, He would be the one that put those in place, so He would follow them.

JohnnyB

[kite]

I think that the young vs. old earth debate will go on untill the 2nd coming. There is evidence both Scrtiptural and scientific that supports both arguments very well. I believe the old earth theory, you the young but the most important issue is God himself. I really don't want to get too cought up in the duration of Creation because it seems like it may draw the focus away from Creation itself. Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree on this point, however I applaud your conviction and faith.

[Cipher]

In the end, most of us will agree to disagree. I applaud everyone in this thread for having a civilized debate.

Cheers

Ciph

[BM]

Here's the way I look at it. Let's say that everything I believe in is not true. There is no God, no salvation through Jesus Christ his son, and when we die we just lay inthe ground and rot. If this is the case than I have lost nothing for believing the opposite. But on the other hand if everything I believe is true, than those who do not believe have lost everything.

[kite]

True. You certainly can't fault anyone for a life well lived.

[JohnnyB]

I agree we can disagree on this but do consider my question to you, at what point did God change, day, night, evening and morning to a 24 hour peroid. I think it was very plan from the word study supplied by the Huge Ross website.

This isn't a salvation issue the day age theory, I still stand on Sola Scriptura and it says creation revels who He is.

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,"

By the reading of His word and the study of those words, I don't see the day age theory. We don't rely on science to determen who God is or how He works but on His word alone.

I think this discussion places the focus on who the Creator is and what His attributes are. In my view saying God took millions or billions of year to make His creation, place Him in the time frame that man works in and He is outside that time frame. We need to be careful we don't fall into what this verse is talking about.

Romans 1:23 "and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things."

We don't use mans ways to figure out Gods ways.

Isaiah 55:9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts."

We need to be doing what Paul said to Timothy in

2 Timothy 2:15 "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

JohnnyB

[kite]

To address your question, the Hebrew phrase "evening and morning" or "evening, and there was morning" is not limited to a 24 hour day. This or variants of this phrase are seen throughout Scripture and refer to a continuous process or activites. Exodus 18:13, 27:21, Leviticus 24:2-3 and Daniel 18:14, 26. We also know that the 3rd day had to have been longer than a 24 hour period, the text states that the land produced plants and trees. After they were produced, it refers to seed bearing fruit, this takes years. Remember the text says that the land produced these trees (natural process). Adam named the all of the animals and somehow became lonely in one day? Some translations have Adam saying "this is now........(my wife) and others "this at last .......(is my wife). God rested on the seventh day, with the other six being closed out, but where is the close of the seventh day? God is still resting, not in His miracles but in His creation and we know that He begins again with a new Jerusalem. In it's original Hebrew (more accruately translated in KJV than NIV) Genisis states "These are the generations of the Heavens and of the earth when they were created in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens". If these were 24 hour days, why in the day of the Lord reference which clearly indicates a longer period of time? There are many other allusions to a much more ancient earth, like I said this debate could go on indeffinately I think it's better to "shake hands" and as said before agree to disagree.

[JohnnyB]

Exodus 18:13, 27:21, Leviticus 24:2-3 none of these refer to a period of time longer then the time frame between morning nad evening and Daniel 18:14, 26 isn't a scripture so I'm going to assume you meant 8:14, 26, 14 is talikng about a literal 3 and a half year period and 26 explains that it talking about a period that is longer then evening to morning and it's dealing with prophecy. You can't take one interpitation of one scripture that clearly say it's talking about a longer period of time and apply it to all scripture.

Your interpetation of the thrid day is limiting Gods power to nature, He is the creator of nature so He is not bound by it, He controls it, it doesn't control Him.

Genesis 1:11 "11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so"

This doesn't say the seed or fruit was produced that day but that the the tree yeilds fruit and the fruit yeilds seed, it doesn't say they yeilded the fruit or the seed. But lets say it does say that, the final statement indecates that it happened on the day "and it was so" Then the 13th verse says "So the evening and the morning were the third day." A defining associated term, as mentioned in the word study from the site you supplied.

As far as rested goes here's a definition from Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology

Yahweh, the Creator of the universe, rested from the act of creating on the seventh day. "God blessed the seventh day and made it holy because on it he rested from all the work of creation he had done" (Gen 2:2). God contemplated his own work, knowing that it was good.

The word generations in Genesis 2:4 simply means the histroy of their creation. From Easton's Bible Dictionary "Genesis 2:4, "These are the generations," means the "history."

Like I mentioned earlier, this isn't a salvation issue, but it does border on denying His power. Brother fully research all thing without a bios, I've had to change my thoughts on many things. We don't need to appease modern science by lowering God to their standard, we need to stand on what His word says and rely on it alone for our standard.

Bro I'll see if I can find some info on Spirit Lake, this is by Mount Saint Helens. When the mountain erupted it created a canyon 1/40 the size of the Grand Canyon, which modern science says took millions to billions of years to create, yet this happen almost instantly. It also petrified trees, which modern science says took million to billions of years, yet these came about almost instantly. I know ICR carrys it, you should buy it and watch it or see if you can rent it from a book store. Reading a good book on Hermenutics helps to understand how to interpret the Word also.

Bro when I first became a Christian I was involved with a group that misinterpeted the Word and used it for their own agenda, lording their power over the people. They believed everything the pastor said as gospel. When I began to speak up about the way they interpeted the Word they became to try and discredit me as a person but never dealing with the way they interpeted the Word. This is what drove me to weight all things through the Word and what someone says it means but to find out what it means on my own. Just because a guy has some letters after his name doesn't mean he know it all or that he doesn't have a motive behind the way he does things.

May the Lord Bless you and keep you by His grace and mercy.

JohnnyB

[JohnnyB]

What I said about Mount Saint Helens wasn't the way it was but here is the article.

MT. ST HELENS AND CATASTROPHISM
- IMPACT No. 157 July 1986
by Steven A. Austin, Ph.D.*

© Copyright 2004 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved.

The eruption of Mount St. Helens in Washington State on May 18, 1980, is certain to be remembered as one of the most significant geologic events in the United States of the 20th century. The explosion, on May 18, was initiated by an earthquake and rockslide involving one-half cubic mile of rock. As the summit and north slope slid off the volcano that morning, pressure was released inside the volcano - where super hot liquid water immediately flashed to steam. The northward-directed steam explosion released energy equivalent to 20 million tons of TNT, which toppled 150 square miles of forest in six minutes. In Spirit lake, north of the volcano, an enormous water wave, initiated by one-eighth cubic mile of rockslide debris, stripped trees from slopes as high as 850 feet above the pre-eruption water level. The total energy output, on May 18, was equivalent to 400 million tons of TNT - approximately 20,000 Hiroshima-size atomic bombs.

On May 18 and also during later eruptions, critical energy thresholds were exceeded by potent geologic processes which were able to accomplish significant changes in short order. These processes challenge the traditional uniformitarian way of thinking about how the earth works, and serve as a miniature laboratory for catastrophism. Institute for Creation Research scientists have spent three summers investigating the geologic changes which have occurred at the volcano. Four of the most significant discoveries are summarized in this short report.

RAPIDLY FORMED STRATIFICATION

Up to 400 feet thickness of strata have formed since 1980 at Mount St. Helens. These deposits accumulated from primary air blast, landslide, waves on the lake, pyroclastic flows, mudflows, air fall, and stream water. Perhaps the most surprising accumulations are the pyroclastic flow deposits amassed from ground-hugging, fluidized, turbulent slurries of fine volcanic debris, which moved at high velocities off the flank of the volcano as the eruption plume of debris over the volcano collapsed. These deposits include fine pumice ash laminae and beds from one millimeter thick to greater than one meter thick, each representing just a few seconds to several minutes of accumulation. A deposit accumulated in less than one day, on June 12, 1980, is 25 feet thick and contains many thin laminae and beds. Conventionally, sedimentary laminae and beds are assumed to represent longer seasonal variations, or annual changes, as the layers accumulated very slowly. Mount St. Helens teaches us that the stratified layers commonly characterizing geological formations can form very rapidly by flow processes. Such features have been formed quickly underwater in laboratory sedimentation tanks, and it should not surprise us to see that they have formed in a natural catastrophe.

RAPID EROSION

Erosion during volcanic eruptions at Mount St. Helens was accomplished by scour from steam blast, landslide, water waves, hot pumice ash flows (pyroclastic flows), and mudflows. Since the eruptions, the erosion process has been dominated by sheet flooding and channelized flow of water, with occasional mudflows. About 23 square miles of the North Fork of the Toutle River Valley was obstructed by two-thirds cubic mile of landslide and pyroclastic debris, which has been rapidly eroded since 1980. Jetting steam from buried water and ice under hot pumice reamed steam explosion pits with associated mass-wasting processes at the margins of pits, producing rills and gullies over 125 feet deep. Photographic documentation assembled by ICR scientists demonstrates that very pronounced rills and gullies had formed at the margins of seam explosion pits before May 23 - less than five days after the pumice was deposited. The rills and gullies resemble badlands topography, which geologists have usually assumed required many hundreds or even thousands of years to form.

Mudflows, from Mount St. Helens, were responsible for the most significant erosion. A mudflow on March 19, 1982, eroded a canyon system up to 140 feet deep in the headwaters of the North Fork of the Toutle River Valley, establishing the new dendritic pattern of drainage. As ICR scientists surveyed this new terrain, they began to contemplate the processes which may have formed the Grand Canyon of the Colorado River. The little "Grand Canyon of the Toutle River" is a one-fortieth scale model of the real Grand Canyon. The small creeks which flow through the headwaters of the Toutle River today might seem, by present appearances, to have carved these canyons very slowly over a long time period, except for the fact that the erosion was observed to have occurred rapidly! Geologists should learn that, since the long-time scale they have been trained to assign to landform development would lead to obvious error on Mount St. Helens, it also may be useless or misleading elsewhere.

UPRIGHT DEPOSITED LOGS

The landslide generated waves on Spirit Lake stripped the forests from the slopes adjacent to the lake and created an enormous log mat, made up of millions of prone floating trunks that occupy about two square miles of the lake surface. These logs float freely as the wind blows them, and the decreasing size of the log mat indicates that the trees are gradually sinking to the lake floor. Careful observation of the floating log mat indicates that many trees float in upright position, with a root ball submerging the root end of the trunk, while the opposite end floats out of the water. Hundreds of upright floated and deposited logs have been grounded in shallow water along the shore of the lake. These trees, if buried in sediment, would appear to have been a forest which grew in place over hundreds of years, which is the standard geological interpretation for the upright petrified "forests" at Yellowstone National Park.

In order to get more information on the upright deposited logs in Spirit Lake, members of the ICR research team worked with Dr. Harold Coffin, of Geoscience Research Institute, to survey the lake bottom, using sonar and scuba. Hundreds of upright, fully submerged logs were located by sidescan sonar, and scuba divers verified that they were, indeed, trunks of trees which the sonar detected.

Extrapolating from the area of lake floor surveyed to the entire lake bottom, we estimate more than 19,000 upright stumps existed on the floor of the lake in August 1985. The average height of an upright deposited stump is 20 feet. Sonar records and scuba investigations verified that many of the upright deposited trees have root masses radiating away from the bases of the trunks. Furthermore, the trees are randomly spaced, not clumped together, over the bottom of the lake, again having the appearance of being an in situ forest. Scuba investigation of the upright deposited trunks shows that some are already solidly buried by sedimentation, with more than three feet of sediment around their bases, while others have no sediment around their bases. This proved that the upright trees were deposited at different times, with their roots buried at different levels. If found buried in the stratigraphic record, these trees might be interpreted as multiple forests which grew on different levels over periods of thousands of years. The Spirit Lake upright deposited stumps, therefore, have considerable implications for interpreting "petrified forests" in the stratigraphic record.

PEAT LAYER IN SPIRIT LAKE

The enormous log mat floating on Spirit Lake has lost its bark and branches by the abrasive action of wind and waves. Scuba investigations of the lake bottom showed that water-saturated sheets of tree bark are especially abundant on the bottom of the lake, where, in areas removed from volcanic sediment added from the lake shore, a layer of peat several inches thick has accumulated. The Spirit Lake peat resembles, both compositionally and texturally, certain coal beds of the eastern United States, which also are dominated by tree bark and appear to have accumulated beneath floating log mats. Coal is supposed, conventionally, to have accumulated from organic material accumulated in swamps by growth in place of plants and burial. Because the accumulation of peat in swamps is a slow process, geologists have supposed that coal beds required about one thousand years to form each inch of coal. The peat layer in Spirit lake, however, demonstrates that peat accumulate rapidly. Swamp peats, however, have only very rare bark sheet material because the intrusive action of tree roots disintegrates and homogenizes the peat. The Spirit Lake peat, in contrast, is texturally very similar to coal. All that is needed is burial and slight heating to transform the Spirit Lake peat into coal. Thus, at Spirit Lake, we may have seen the first stage in the formation of coal.

CONCLUSION

Mount St. Helens provides a rare opportunity to study transient geologic processes which produced, within a few months, changes which geologists might otherwise assume required many thousands of years. The volcano, therefore, challenges our way of thinking about how the earth works, how it changes, and the time scale we are accustomed to attaching to its formations. These processes and their effects allow Mount St. Helens to serve as a miniature laboratory for catastrophism. Mount St. Helens helps us to imagine what the Biblical Flood, of Noah's day, may have been like.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. S.A. Austin, 1979, Depositional Environment of the Kentucky No. 12 Coal Bed (Middle Pennsylvanian) of Western Kentucky, with Special Reference to the Origin of Coal Lithotypes (Pennsylvania State University, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation) 411 p.
2. S.A. Austin, 1984, "Rapid Erosion at Mount St. Helens" (Origins Vol.11, No.2) pp.90-98.
3. SA. Austin, 1984, Catastrophes in Earth History: A Source Book of Geologic Evidence, Speculation and Theory (El Cajon, Calif., Institute for Creation Research, Monograph No.13) 318 p.
4. H.G. Coffin, 1983, "Mount St. Helens and Spirit Lake" (Origins Vol.10) pp.9-17.
5. H.G. Coffin, 1983, "Erect Floating Stumps in Sprit Lake, Washington" (Geology Vol.11) pp.298, 299.
6. R. Decker and B. Decker, 1981, "The Eruption of Mount. St. Helens" (Scientific American, Vol.244, No.3) pp.68-80.
7. W.J. Fritz, 1980, "Reinterpretation of the Depositional Environment of the Yellowstone Fossil Forests" (Geology, Vol.8) pp.309-313.
8. P.W. Lipman and D.R. Mullineaux, eds., 1981, The 1980 Eruptions of Mount St. Helens, Washington (U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1250) 844 p.
9. C.L. Rosenfdd, and G.L. Beach, 1983, Evolution of a Drainage Network: Remote Sensing Analysis of the North Fork Toutle River, Mount St. Helens, Washington (Corvallis, Oregon State University Water Resources Research Institute, WRRI-88) 100 p.
10. P.D. Rowley, et al., 1985, "Proximal Bedded Deposits Related to Pyroctastic Flows of May 18, 1980, Mount St. Helens, Washington" (Geol. Soc., Amer. Bull., Vol. 96) pp. 1373-1383.
11. R.B. Waitt, Jr., et al., 1983, "Eruption-Triggered Avalanche, Flood, and Lahar at Mount St. Helens—Effects of Winter Snowpack" (Science, Vol.221) pp. 1394-1397.

* Dr. Austin is Chairman of the Geology Department in the ICR Graduate School.