Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ImJustAnotherOkie; Laissez-faire capitalist; afsnco
ImJustAnotherOkie: "When it comes to the Age of the Earth the literal interpretation looses all credibility."

First of all, the "literal interpretation" (whatever that might mean) is not science, period, it's religion and cannot be taught as "science".

Second of all, both Old Testament (Psalms 90:4) and New (2 Peter 3:8) make clear that God's view of time is vastly different from our own.

Third, Genesis itself provides no scientific specifics on how God accomplished His creations.
We are therefore free to fill in the details with whatever scientific evidence and theories seem best.

Those are some of the basics on which all of western civilization's natural-science is built.

22 posted on 02/08/2014 4:57:13 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: BroJoeK

Absolutely there is room for a lot of interpretation. Literal creationists will burn themselves in effigy before admitting carbon dating is valid, and the earth is over 40,000 years old. Granted they have arguments for every case but you just can’t be inflexible and claim Noah’s Ark accounts for all life on earth.

The people back then had no concept what comprised earth. No antique globes have surfaced I’m aware of. The earth they knew was flooded but most certainly there were a few spots left high and dry.


37 posted on 02/08/2014 1:14:38 PM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson