Tree Devotionals (Contain Bible Verses, so enter at your own risk)

[Reach]

I'm not familiar with Gondwana right off hand. I believe Pangaea is usually attributed to the global flood. The old world was completely destroyed. "The floodgates of heaven were opened and the fountains of the deep burst forth." This would probably include tectonic shifting, earthquakes, and massive volcanic activity. I believe a common view is that the ice age came after the flood, which would have locked up a lot of the ocean water, causing lower ocean levels (which can be documented by ancient cities hundreds of feet underwater), and more land bridges (likely how aborigines made it to Australia). Anyway, don't quote me on any of that.

A lot of the answers you are looking for can be found among the articles at this link: https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/

Ken Ham is one who knows his stuff and can prove everything he speaks about. He is one I have looked to for answers about creation and the fossil record for many years.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

@Reach
Thanks for the link. I read the main article and a bit more. So far, what I'm taking away confirms what I believe. There's no way for me to engage in any discussion about how YE doesn't work for my beliefs.

 

[Rooted.Tree.Solutions]

You can believe in YE...I don't. No use trying to change my mind.

I find it sad and disheartening that you’re unwilling to have a dialogue and discuss scientific facts. You are intentionally blinding yourself to truth. Scientists are making more discoveries with each passing day and there’s current evidence for a YE that you’ve never even seen or heard about and you’re simply dismissing it because it goes against your beliefs. My question would be, what truth are your beliefs founded upon? Please don’t say science because you’ve already stated that scientific proof for a YE won’t change your mind.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

I don't have the ambition to write continuously.

Dialogue? Social media isn't the place to dialog about such big topics.

I just got done reading a couple of the articles in the link about continental drift and using tree/sediment/ice layers for setting up timelines. The language that's used to make the YE point would get red-lined in any critical writing milieu.

What really confuses me is why YE fans use the word 'day' or 'year' in the bible so literally rather than figuratively. Using a figurative interpretation sure doesn't disprove what I read as the 'infallibility of god's word' that overlies all of this.

When I was in first and second grades and getting first religious education there were characters in the bible that lived to be hundreds of years old. That made the whole class laugh. How can the earth be made in seven days and these ol' guys live to be 600 years!? The teacher did a wonderful job of explaining 'poetic license' into a concept that we could accept.

I guess that 6k years for YE folks means back to Egyptian times for me.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Scientists are making more discoveries with each passing day and there’s current evidence for a YE that you’ve never even seen or heard about and you’re simply dismissing it because it goes against your beliefs

Show me links to what you're saying.

I'm open minded and change my beliefs when I learn something new. I drive people batty who are near me with how I tinker with things. One friend named it as 'The Tom Touch'. I don't leave well enough alone.

Wait...Its not 'simiply' and I believe what I believe just as you do. I don't have the faith in the bible that you do as a source of science.

 

[CaPowell]

I find it sad and disheartening that you’re unwilling to have a dialogue and discuss scientific facts. You are intentionally blinding yourself to truth. Scientists are making more discoveries with each passing day and there’s current evidence for a YE that you’ve never even seen or heard about and you’re simply dismissing it because it goes against your beliefs. My question would be, what truth are your beliefs founded upon? Please don’t say science because you’ve already stated that scientific proof for a YE won’t change your mind.

I'm impressed (and thankful) Tom is here and that he has read as much as he has. He has referred to extra resources mentioned and immediately investigated the Answers in Genesis website. We are operating from different worldviews. What I take for granted or may think is obvious, Tom views from a different angle (from which he has likely been viewing the world for a lifetime) and different things seem obvious to him.

While there is reading between the lines and conjecture involved in a lot of this (like the Bible never mentioning Pangaea), I think most of the creation study organizations, like Answers in Genesis and the Creation Research institute, are highly logical and scientific. Let's keep bringing logical, scientific evidence that makes good plain sense!

At the end of the day, all of this is secondary for me. I just think it is interesting and could talk about it all day. The real question is "Who was Jesus and why was He hanging on a cross?". I think there is ample evidence to prove that Jesus was indeed the Son of God; God in the flesh. So, I take His word for truth. Jesus set His seal of approval on the story of Adam and Eve, so I believe they were real people. He compared His return to the flood of Noah's day sweeping the unrighteous away, so I believe in a literal flood. He said Jonah spent three days in the belly of a great fish, so I believe that too. The world will laugh at me for believing this, but I'm not too worried about it because I know Jesus rose from the dead, proving Himself to be who He said He was- God.

That makes believing in special creation pretty easy for us Christians...

 

[Rooted.Tree.Solutions]

Show me links to what you're saying.

I'm open minded and change my beliefs when I learn something new. I drive people batty who are near me with how I tinker with things. One friend named it as 'The Tom Touch'. I don't leave well enough alone.

Wait...Its not 'simiply' and I believe what I believe just as you do. I don't have the faith in the bible that you do as a source of science.

Scientists are making new discoveries everyday. I think we can all agree on that.

As for current evidence that you may not have seen, well there is a wealth of information in the link @Reach posted. Take this example:

Amazingly Preserved Leaves

Beautifully preserved fossils are so common that we overlook how unusual they are.

answersingenesis.org

I thought it appropriate to discuss leaf fossils ;-) How would evolutionists explain MILLIONS of leaf fossils that are perfectly flat and perfectly preserved? Truly remarkable!

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Amazingly Preserved Leaves

Beautifully preserved fossils are so common that we overlook how unusual they are.

answersingenesis.org

Piffle!!!!

When I was a kid the Mississippi River was less than a quarter mile behind our house. Right next to it was a small creek, Coon Creek, that was about 30' across at its mouth.

Every spring we'd go on our first hike as soon as the Miss. water went down. I remember many times Dad pointing out the layer of last fall's tree leaves, grass, nettles etc. matted down and covered by the silt from spring run off. We were just below a dam on the Miss so flooding wasn't an issue.

I get fed up with lame writers, like in the link, who say things with such confidence when its so easy to show that what they're saying isn't as solid as they think. What rubbish!!!

Wiki has some faults but at least it has checks and balances built in for editing or calling BS on what is written. This writer gets away without being questioned and his minions believe it all.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

there is a wealth of information in the link

I found most of the information poor quality though. Very few annotations. Lots of statements made with no research to add credence to the statement.

What IS the basis for YE? Can anyone share links to explanations? There has to be a side by side comparison between the issues raised by YE beliefs and, uh, not sure how to name The Other view based in science I guess.

I stumbled across something that I couldn't make heads nor tails about that seemed related to water being in some layer around the Earth like an atmospheric layer. Then it leaked and caused this flood that is mentioned...what the heck is THAT?!

Where does the research for YE go on? What colleges? Is it all done at theological schools? Where is the debating or discussing going on?

 

[CaPowell]

Every spring we'd go on our first hike as soon as the Miss. water went down. I remember many times Dad pointing out the layer of last fall's tree leaves, grass, nettles etc. matted down and covered by the silt from spring run off. We were just below a dam on the Miss so flooding wasn't an issue.

Yes, but did the layers of leaves that you saw each year turn into fossils or did they quickly turn mushy and gunky? I grew up by a three acre pond and organic debris seemed to congregate towards one shallow end. I remember trudging through it sometimes and stirring it up. Pretty nasty stinky stuff. No fossils, but a good place to get leeches... Anyway, I think something else would have to go on to turn the leaves in my childhood pond into fossils.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Fossilization is pretty well understood. The conditions are mysterious. Having layer and layers of materials that DIDN"T decay isn't unlikely or unique. It happened...think coal.

How about answering some of my other questions?

I'm really trying to understand this whole YE stuff. If it's valid there must be plenty of documented research that upends traditional science. So far I haven't found any but others in this thread seem like they're familiar.

 

[Rooted.Tree.Solutions]

I found most of the information poor quality though. Very few annotations. Lots of statements made with no research to add credence to the statement.

What IS the basis for YE? Can anyone share links to explanations? There has to be a side by side comparison between the issues raised by YE beliefs and, uh, not sure how to name The Other view based in science I guess.

I stumbled across something that I couldn't make heads nor tails about that seemed related to water being in some layer around the Earth like an atmospheric layer. Then it leaked and caused this flood that is mentioned...what the heck is THAT?!

Where does the research for YE go on? What colleges? Is it all done at theological schools? Where is the debating or discussing going on?

I have to agree with @CaPowell and wanted you to know Tom that it’s refreshing that you’re willing to look into this. I’m attaching a link to a brief argument for YE and within the article is a link to the longer more scientific article.

The basis for a YE is based on the foundational literal interpretation of Scripture. That starting point and foundational truth is what leads Biblical scientists to a young earth. Evolutionists work backwards, they look at what they see in the worl today and try to predict how it came to be that way. Evolutionists and Creationists are looking at the same evidence but come to different conclusions based on their different worldviews.

The atmospheric layer of water you refer to has to do with the way the world was when God originally created it. Our world today is different than the way it was originally created due to the catastrophic events of a global flood.

Young-Earth Creationist View Summarized And Defended

There is a great amount of controversy in the church today regarding evolution and the age of the earth. Many competing views attract the attention of Christians producing great confusion and leading

answersingenesis.org

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Evolutionists and Creationists are looking at the same evidence but come to different conclusions based on their different worldviews.

That be me.

YE makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

[Reach]

That be me.

YE makes absolutely no sense to me.

Tom, thank you for your honesty and your willingness to share your views and your confusion. I look at the world from a biblical perspective, so to me it is very hard to see “billions of years” as a plausible theory, but I realize that many if not most disagree with me there.

I like your question about finding a source that lines up young earth and old earth theories side by side, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen something quite like that, but I will do some looking. I will also try to find some cited works that disprove the theory of the old earth.

One excellent book that comes to mind is “Distant Starlight in a Young Universe” by D. Russell Humphreys. It is a great book that explains in common English how the stars can be so far away and yet we can see them. The book also includes all the math that proves the theories laid out in the first half of the book, I cannot handle all off the math, but a good friend of mine did prove it himself and confirms that it works.

Edit: The book referenced above appears to have been reprinted as “Starlight & Time” but I believe it is the same book.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Bill Bryson did the best job of showing me around our universe.

A Short History of Nearly Everything: Bryson, Bill: 8601410908072: Books - Amazon

A Short History of Nearly Everything [Bryson, Bill] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. A Short History of Nearly Everything

www.amazon.com

 

[CaPowell]

Where does the research for YE go on? What colleges? Is it all done at theological schools? Where is the debating or discussing going on?

I don't usually get on my phone at work, but I got rained out a little bit today.

I believe the book I offered to send has references. Dr. John Morris wrote it. Pretty sure he is a PhD in geology. His father, Dr. Henry Morris started the Institute for Creation Research and is often lauded as the father of modern creation sciences. I think their organization actively does research. They have a fifteen minute radio broadcast on Sundays that I have caught a handful of times. The host/researcher on the program was discussing analyzing drilling samples (I think from oil companies) from something like 600 sites in North America and 600 sites in Africa. The same layers are found across the globe in the same order. Interesting stuff.

I have also heard of researchers being fired in the past decade or so for finding evidence that conflicts with evolution and an old earth. Several folks have found soft tissue in dinosaur fossils, which obviously shouldn't be there if they are 160 million years old.

Judging by the language, I think Answers in Genesis and icr.org are trying to target a very broad audience, including kids, so they present things in a simple, straightforward manner that can be easily understood. References would be nice though.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

I think Answers in Genesis and icr.org are trying to target a very broad audience, including kids, so they present things in a simple, straightforward manner that can be easily understood.

That's patronizing

 

[CaPowell]

That's patronizing

I'm just saying it's totally different from the article you posted on penguins. Totally different audience.

Which is better, something that is clothed in so much gobbledygook that hardly anyone understands it, so everyone assumes the people are brilliant and take their word for it (even though their opening paragraph admits to having no evidence whatsoever for two out of three of the proposed stages of penguin development) or something written plainly that anyone can understand? I know which I prefer. It in no way means the articles at Answers in Genesis are written by unintelligent people.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

... written by unintelligent people.

Intelligence isn't a measure of what a person does by any means.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

I'm going to park this here so I can find it later.

No reason anyone can't read up on floods.

Google Search