eyethink2 states, regarding the aim of the original authors: “Their discussion is both to refute the general Young Earth idea, as well as Darwinian evolution. I find what they present to be for me, lacking on both fronts.”
We, the original authors, never intended to discuss evolution. We didn’t think we needed to, because so much has already been written that refutes that idea as error. For us, it is sufficient to say, that there is no certain evidence that macro-evolution ever occurred. The Bible says: God created – and for us that is truth. We believe the clear statements of Scripture, as we presume you do.
The you say, as a non-scientist, “I’m challenged by what appears to be self evident (i.e. “truth”) to them.” We accept that there is a difficulty in such circumstances, and more so when the scientist has devoted his entire working life as a research scientist working in teams of scientists, and often for very long hours, to resolve some of the complexities that nature brings to the table or bench for study. However, we will do our best to take the time necessary to communicate on the sending side if you are willing to do your best to take the time necessary on the receiving side of this communication. And ask further questions if necessary, so we can explain further what we might not have succeeded explaining adequately the first time round.
At this stage, to us, it appears that:
Eyethink2 expresses doubt concerning several aspects of creation, and seeks evidence:
Firstly, 6 days of creation activity (creation week). Exodus 20:11 states: “For in 6 days the Lord made heaven and earth …”. this He wrote with His own finger in stone (Exodus 31:18). The 6-day creation is repeated in Exodus 31:17 and of course in Genesis 1 and 2. The Sabbath was observed by the Israelites after the Exodus from Egypt, implying recognition of the 7-day weekly cycle.
While the 7-day week appears to have been in the Sumerian calendar and Babylonian creation myths (e.g. Enuma Elish) are recorded on tablets, Genesis 1 is the only ancient record detailing the creation account expressed in terms of days. Genesis 1 is vastly different from the ancient myths. Read Enuma Elish and you find human language of that time. Read Genesis 1,2 and you are in a different world of literature, with inspired language and with a week of 7 days – the signature number for God from Genesis to Revelation. We accept the 6 days of creation as “Truth”, and don’t see the need for evidence from science to back that as fact. We experience the 7 day weekly cycle on planet Earth today in our everyday lives.
Secondly, evidence of Creation Week (CW) 6,000 years ago. Based on the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 CW occurred recently, 6 to 10 thousand years ago. This is in accord with God’s Book of Nature amplified by modern science. If CW occurred before 10,000 years ago, it would be during an ice age. We have referred previously (Spectrum, 28 Sept., 2015) to this, and the fact that it would not be compatible with the perfect climate of Eden.
The YEC view is that 6,000 years ago, during CW, everything was formed (the planet earth, the universe, and all life forms). In the original article (Spectrum, 10 Feb., 2016), we emphasised that this view was in error, and then gave our reasons.
We have concluded that Creation Week occurred recently on an “old” Earth, crated as part of the Universe eons earlier. This is in accord with Scripture, and God’s Book of Nature, and is supported by modern science. Surely, such evidence can be termed “Truth”. The creative activity of CW focussed on the three biospheres of Earth: (1) the heavens (i.e. the atmosphere or sky), (2) the land, and (3) the sea. (Exodus 20:11, Ezekiel 38:20).
It appears that eyethink2 considers the above to be of doubtful importance, and appears also to question whether or not there is a God. We (the authors) consider the matters raised above relate to God’s “Truth” for the last days, and God’s last message to the Earth’s inhabitants with a call to worship the Creator. This is THE Adventist Message!
We regret that some authors we had quoted sounded rude to you “eyethink2”. We expect it was due to their disdain for YEC who misquote at times to distort Biblical Truth, or reports of science. We hope that we were not rude in any way, even in quoting what you must have though to be our rude comments.
“This is a faith deal.” for you, as you said, and hence we add:
The words of the Lord are ure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times (Psalm 12:6).
Guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Saviour, and my hope is in you all day long. (Psalm 25:5 NIV).
We hope now to have satisfied to some extent at least some of your questions. Have we done any better?