The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Old Earth vs. Young Earth Article

Hi

I am slowly working through the articles that Pilgrim posted called Old Earth vs. Young Earth.

In the article put forth by Modern Reformation, it says the following as a precursor to their article.
"Modern Reformation as an organization does not take a view on the age of the earth other than to say that Genesis was not revealed in order to provide a scientific description of origins but as an historical prologue justifying God's lordship over all creation. The editors believe that this article is an important contribution to the "hallway" conversation (C.S. Lewis) that we are trying to facilitate in our pages. We realize that not every article we publish will appeal to every one of our subscribers, but we hope that you'll agree that Modern Reformation stimulates your thinking, challenging you to know what you believe and why you believe it."

While I definitely do not agree with the Old Age view, over the last few years I have run into a lot of Reformed Christians who do not believe in the 6/24 day view.
These same Reformed Christians as far as I can tell are pretty consistent when it comes to other doctrine of the faith, but for what ever reason, when it comes to the age of the earth, that is where they become inconsistent.

I mention this mainly because if memory serves me correctly, the staff at Modern Reformation is not all in agreement when it comes to this particular issue. Hence, it would probably be the main reason why they do not take a view on the age of the earth as an organization.

I would like to comment on the first part of Modern Reformation’s comment.

"Modern Reformation as an organization does not take a view on the age of the earth other than to say that Genesis was not revealed in order to provide a scientific description of origins but as an historical prologue justifying God's lordship over all creation.”

I am not totally sure I agree with them about the scientific aspect of this quote. While Genesis might not go into a detailed scientific description of origins; can we honestly say that it does not give us a basic scientific description of origins?

Tom

Ok Tom define for me the term "scientific description" and then show me the scientists that agree with that definition and agree that the description of creation found in Genesis 1-2 fulfills that description.

Peter
I think I know what you’re saying, the term "scientific description" says more than what I was saying.

I guess something just doesn't sit right with me when I read the words:
"Modern Reformation as an organization does not take a view on the age of the earth other than to say that Genesis was not revealed in order to provide a scientific description of origins but as an historical prologue justifying God's lordship over all creation.”

The creation account in Genesis one and two is more than just a "historical prologue justifying God's lordship over all creation.”
That is the kind of reasoning that even a theistic evolutionist can make.

Tom

I thought this was really cool . What do you guys think?

Allthisstuff:

While I hold to a six day young earth creation I tend to discount Ken Hovind aka Dr. Dino as he is in federal prison (last I checked) for tax evasion. And if he is stealing then he has violated the rules for elders and teachers. (Titus 1:5-8)