Young Earth Creationists killing Christian credibility?

Ken Ham is an excellent marketer and salesperson for Young Earth Creationism.Ken_Ham

I should know — much of my professional background is in marketing, working with some of the most talented marketers and sales people on the planet.

I got the chance to hear Ken Ham. He was speaking at a home schooling conference my wife and I attended.

What I experienced from Ken Hams was masterful rhetorical skill; skillfully crafted,

fear-driven persuasion; and artful manipulation of the audience’s emotions to get them to buy into his vision of Creationism.

I grew up a Young Earth Creationist. It sounded fantastic when I was 14. But in time I came to recognize that in order for Ham’s vision of where we came from to make sense, you have to dramatically revise most of our modern, scientifically-verifiable understanding of life and the universe. (The speed of light, for example.)

Young Earth Creationism played a major role in my brother Bryan losing faith and becoming an agnostic. YEC backfires badly on the smartest and most curious students. Bright kids walk away from faith literally every day because Ken Ham forces them to choose between the Bible and science.

This leaves Christian parents heartbroken, terrified and defensive. It makes for tense conversations with your 22-year-old college senior at Thanksgiving dinner.

This launched my 10-year journey of writing Evolution 2.0.

By refusing to consider that secular science may have some accurate facts — dismissing them whole cloth — Young Earth Creationists cannot have a productive conversation with people who understand empirical science.

This kind of stubbornness leaves you stuck.

This destroys the credibility required to have a meaningful conversation with non-Christian people.

When folks like Ham stand up and claim to speak for all Christians, we lose face in the debate.

The good news is, there’s a better narrative that allows for God and evolution — religion and science — to coexist. One where all of modern science’s discoveries only support the mystery of God, not debunk it.

This video may give you a new perspective…

Click here now to get 3 chapters from my new book, Evolution 2.0, right now. 

Related:

A closer look at Genesis 1

Is Evolution Biblical?

270 Responses

  1. Stefano says:

    “There is not immense evidence that the secular record is wrong. There is almost no evidence that the earth is young. And don’t say I didn’t warn you – if you wade into the topic with willingness to really examine the evidence, you will see that the YEC position is tragically lacking in empirical support”

    But who is telling you this Perry?

    You are not obliged to accept the materialist assumptions.

    A real Christian must build his vision of the world by putting the Bible in the first place. Who ridicules YEC, also ridicules the resurrection of Jesus. If it is true that Jesus is risen, it is also true that the earth may be young because nothing is impossible with God.

    The materialist worldview is built entirely on the total negation of the possibility of miracles. With regard to the unclear things YEC does not mean that it is false, but only that you have to look for a better solution, and it is a much more exciting challenge, see for example the book of Woodmorappe about Noah’s Ark. http://www.amazon.it/Noahs-Ark-A-Feasibility-Study/dp/0932766412

    Please Perry, repent from this false doctrine, because they are deceiving hundreds of people.

    Atheists hate God 100% and reject him into stubborn way and hate and reject even your pet-theory of “evolution 2.0”, you’re only making compromises and demonstrating weakness! http://creation.com/refuting-compromise-refutation-of-hugh-ross-introductory-chapter-and-reviews

    Come back to “biblical creation 1.0”: creation from nothing 6000 years ago and universal flood. And do it NOW, not tomorrow!

    • I believe in the resurrection. http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/ And I believe in miracles. http://www.coffeehousetheology/miracles/

      The Bible does not teach young earth. The Bible doesn’t say anything about how old the earth is. Ken Ham does.

      Nobody had to “tell me” that the earth is old. You can deduce that for yourself from basic verifiable principles and observable facts like the speed of light.

    • Hugh says:

      ‘A real Christian must build his vision of the world by putting the Bible in the first place.’

      My religion from my first birth was a flesh and blood inheritance, and was essentially the performance of ritualistic acts, and repetitions which came to be performed mindlessly. Consequently it was only performed to be accepted as a member of my cultural setting. So when I left home I drifted agnostically through a variety of faith groups, and when I eventually became a Christian it was as an evolutionary theist; but I had been hooked. I wanted to know more, and went down an intellectual road, but such was the quantity and variety of interpretations on offer that I despaired of coming at an understanding of Scripture by than means. It was only by becoming a creationist that I had the security of limitations to my search; to restrict myself to the Bible as much as possible, being open to testing the spirits.
      It was when I came to look at those whom the apostles denied access to Christ that I discovered their importance in furthering my understanding of much of what Our Lord said. These individuals are changeless from generation in their interpretation of Bible stories; they are the children. Christ said that we should receive his message like a little child if we were to enter His Kingdom. Little children are fundamentalists; at Piaget’s ‘concrete operations’ stage.

      • Hugh says:

        Should read: These individuals are changeless from generation to generation in their interpretation of Bible stories; they are the children.

    • Richard Rapier says:

      Love your retort and writing style…keep it up

  2. Robin Boom says:

    I was in a discussion with a young Muslim recently who was trying to show a whole lot of ‘mistakes’ found in the Bible. I told him that until he understands the difference between ‘infallibility’ and ‘inspiration’, then we could not continue our conversation. The Bible does have errors, mistakes and glaring contradictions. It was penned by mortal men, as Amazing Grace was written by John Newton. We may consider John Newton’s hymn to be inspired, as the Bible is ‘inspired’.

    My question is ‘who wrote Genesis?’ Chapter 1 we have God referred to as Elohim, whereas chapter 2 we have God referred to as Jahweh, a name God revealed to Moses. The writer of Genesis therefore was either Moses, or is post Moses, but incorporates the poetic and more ancient Hebrew narrative of Genesis 1.

    I agree with your sentiments Perry, that YEC does a disservice to both God, in forcing God into an ancient poetic human narrative, and Christianity in general as there is so much evidence of an ancient Earth and universe. I work in soil science and agronomy and in some of the volcanic soils I work with, there are striking differences with some relatively recent ones which may be only a few thousand years old, whereas others are severely weathered and date back tens of thousands of years.

  3. Mike says:

    Keep in mind that Adam, unlike us, had no compulsion to sin. And if physical death was just a normal part of life and was on no real significance, then how could Christ’s suffering and death pay for our sins? I used to follow the old earth/ secular/ Hugh Ross timeline, but thank God I’ve since been freed from that way of thinking.

  4. Mike says:

    I can see how someone with a background in science may find it hard to believe that the earth and universe is only thousands of years old. But this is really only because you have been exposed to one side of the issue.

    I really enjoyed watching Perry’s presentation as I appreciate his perspective from mechanics and engineering, but what he found out is nothing new to “young earth creationists.” We’ve known for years that mutations destroy/disrupt genetic information and function. And for years we have known that pre-programmed genetic changes can happen in response to predetermined environmental stimuli. This is how we can have such variety within a created kind. The key point is, there is no evolution as all such changes are pre-programmed and predetermined… not random point mutations.

    If you want to learn more you should read Lee Spetner’s book “Not By Chance.”
    http://www.amazon.com/Chance-Shattering-Modern-Theory-Evolution/dp/1880582244

    And if there were any doubt after reading that book, read “Genetic Entropy.”

    http://usstore.creation.com/catalog/genetic-entropy-p-2065.html

    There are plenty of evidences for a young earth and universe. Here’s 100 good ones. http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

    Starlight and time aren’t a big deal either. The big bang is such a joke of a theory but you wouldn’t know that if you insist on only getting your information form the humanists and Huge Loss. They never confront the fatal weaknesses in their preferred cosmology… they just ignore them and pretend they don’t exist.

    Unfortunately for these guys, we still have some semblance of freedom of speech and thought on the internet. If you think the Big Bang is unassailable and that distant stars are a problem for YEC, then you might want scroll down and watch, “Astronomy- The Heavens Declare the Glory of God.”

    • Hugh says:

      There is also Spetner’s ‘The Evolution Revolution’ and John Sanford’s ‘Genetic Entropy, and the Mystery of the Genome.’ The latter is a response to those geneticists perplexed that the measured accumulation of mutations have not wiped out human and other species thousands of years ago. Their perplexity arises as a consequence of their belief that species have already existed for millions of years.

    • roger drake says:

      Mike, I thank you for your comment. I was beginning to think the only logic allowed here was evolved from long ages and petrified minds. Why do we have such a problem with God created the heaven and the earth.
      One question, did I get it wrong or did God create the garden of eden, did he create man and woman, and various animals along with grass and trees in days?? A day in Hebrew means 24 hour period of time, sunrise to the next sunrise. The question: Did God create all this with age built in? Man was not a baby and raised over decades by ? who? So if God could create man and the garden with age built in why could he not throw a kink in the program by creating the universe so it looked a lot older than it really was? Please, help me out.

    • roger drake says:

      Mike, I thank you for your comment. I was beginning to think the only logic allowed here was evolved from long ages and petrified minds. Why do we have such a problem with God created the heaven and the earth.
      One question, did I get it wrong or did God create the garden of eden, did he create man and woman, and various animals along with grass and trees in days?? A day in Hebrew means 24 hour period of time, sunrise to the next sunrise. The question: Did God create all this with age built in? Man was not a baby and raised over decades by ? who? So if God could create man and the garden with age built in why could he not throw a kink in the program by creating the universe so it looked a lot older than it really was? Please, help me out.

      • Who says there is an older age built in? The raw data fits an earth younger than 10,000 years. As far as the universe itself. The secularist have the exact same problem the young earth creationists have. For either to be true star light had to travel at an infinite speed at first for us to be able to see some of it. Current scientific knowledge simply cannot explain this simply cannot explain this now and its the young earth PHD’s that are the ones putting this problem through a rational scientific thought process based on the known and perhaps unknown laws of physics. The honest secularists admit to this but since so many of them are so dishonest they would rather the public just not know about their little problem.

        • Dan, if a star is 100 million light years away, when did the light leave the star?

          • Well, according to a uniformitarian from the standpoint of the person standing on the earth. 100 million years. Bit more to it than that though. What about from the lights point of view travel at the speed of light? How long for it according to Einstein’s theory? That is a little to deep for me right now though. I just read an article claiming the farthest galaxy viewable though Hubble is 13.3 billion light years way. No problem you say since the universe is 15 billion years old according to most secularists. There is a problem though and that is that according to the uniformitarians that light does not have the time to reach 13 billion more light years the other side of our planet. Yet the temperature of the opposite side of the universe is uniform with the temp from the side this galaxy is on. Indicating that the light from all points of the known universe has reached all points. A physical impossibility if indeed the universe is 15 billion years old. So…secularists and creationists have the same problem.
            http://creation.com/light-travel-time-a-problem-for-the-big-bang

    • Thank you.

  5. Mike says:

    Oh here’s the link for, “Astronomy – The Heavens Declare the Glory of God”

    http://creation.com/creation-tv?page=5

  6. Richard Rapier says:

    When i was 10 years old in 1969 i watched on a black and white tv the lunar landing in Marathon Key florida. The nasa engineers made the legs long and the pads broad for they had determined dust gathers on objects in space at a rate of 1\8 inch per thousand years. When it came to rest the measurable depth was just below 3\4 inch…if the moon is just under 6000 years old then reason concludes the rest of the planets and space is the same. Why is it so hard to hear G-d speak and believe him. [Unless you come as a little child you will not inherit the kingdom] Shalom…the bridegroom is coming

  7. Tom Walker says:

    ‘Ah ken see thuh Demons on ya, bruther!’ Y’all are standing out in a swamp. The biggest problem I have seen reading through these comments is the concept that the Bible has sway over science and reality. It does not and the simplest proof is that the Bible (having been written before most science was done) gets pretty much everything about science wrong. The speed of light will not change with regard to how large the universe is because you want to force it to agree with your interpretation of scripture. VSL (yes ‘variable speed of light’) is a real set of theories and it has not a thing to do with normal time and distance in a vacuum across the universe. The speed of light (one of many refutations of a young earth) will never cooperate with such dillweed interpretations in the effort to support a delusion as far off base as a young earth. This one problem is like saying you think you can prove the distance from New York to L.A. is a few yards because the Bible says so – that is the scale of error. The Bible cannot overcome such straightforward measurements. If you think it can, you should seek medical help. Faith should have not a thing to do with trying to shoe-horn a pre-science era document into a position of scientific authority – that is an insult to Christians everywhere, by the hundreds of millions. The arrogance of it is just beyond belief. To think this crap is true is to find that you have been attending the wrong church; that is what the Christian population numbers say. Perhaps those of you who are young earth believers should consider testing your faith by handling serpents and screaming ‘demons out!’ at people to see if it works. Try a different congregation; maybe next week you will believe something equally wacky.

  8. Mike says:

    Tom Walker is a good example of the kind of person I’ve been talking about. These kinds of people run around saying that the Bible is in disagreement with science; but all such desperate statements are silly. The Bible is in complete harmony with real science. The bible is, however, in direct disagreement with the humanists’ ideas on origins. But thats ok because the humanists’ ideas on origins are nothing more than a faith belief… and a very tenuous one to be sure.

    But somehow, they take comfort in the idea that even though they themselves may not understand the “science” behind their humanist faith, some professor who is smarter than them does understand and he says its so… so it must be. Most of these humanists/atheists have more faith than any Christian, albeit a totally misplaced faith.

    I see some people on here who seem to have a lot of faith in the Big Bang. I wonder if they know that the Big Bang has been discredited to such an extent that many of its adherents are jumping ship. The theory is a joke. You need to watch “Astronomy- The Heavens Declare the Glory of God.”

    Scroll half-way down the page and the show will be on the right hand side

    http://creation.com/creation-tv?page=5

    But if you need to continue to believe in the big bang, you probably shouldn’t watch… it wouldn’t be safe viewing for you. But if you are a Christian, or someone who values truth, then to you I say, enjoy.

    Here are some good articles which destroy atheism at its roots.

    http://www.faithdefenders.com/article-category/articles-atheism.html

    A lot of people, like Tom Walker, are very threatened by Christianity. Since the Bible is true, that Christians are the targets of such vitriol is to be expected. Its actually a nice added confirmation of the Bible.

    • Alberto Bencivenga says:

      Very simple: god has nothing to do with creation and he himself eas crrated by man! And stop considering the Bible more that a collection of fictionaltales! The Bible forbids to make clothes with material obtained mixing together two different fibres so that, for the Bible, it is a seen to wear in summer a dress made out of silk and linen. Now, to say that god gave such a silly command means to consider him mad and this would be blasphaemous!
      AB

    • Robin Boom says:

      Mike

      I hazard a guess you are not a scientist or work in a scientific field as such. You can only quote from CMI and YEC creationist websites and are unable to make your own observations. Its the closed minded bigotry of believing the Bible only is correct and anything that contradicts the Bible is wrong that gets me.

      I work in soil science and live in New Zealand, about 100 km from the site of the world largest volcanic eruption in the last 5000 years which formed Lake Taupo. This occurred just under 1900 years ago, around 130AD and the Chinese recorded seeing the effects of this eruption in their skies over 8000 miles away. The volcanic tephra flows laid down ash layers covering many hundreds of square miles and in some places is hundreds of feet deep. Because of the slow build up of carbon in the topsoil over the past 1900 years on what is essentially silicon dioxide (glass), we can see through soil profiles more ancient volcanic eruptions where topsoils built up over time, and in some places there are multiple tephra flow layers upon volcanic ash and topsoils going back 20-30,000 years. No sign of any flood 4500 years ago. With our flightless native birds such as the kiwi, moa and kakapo, all bear testament to having been here a long time. Australia similarly has unique species such as kangaroos and platypus and if Noahs flood was global like most YEC people argue it is, how did the kangaroo hop its way from Ararat to Australia, the flightless kiwi fly to New Zealand or the non-migratory platypus swim to freshwater ponds in outback Australia 4500 years ago. BTW I love challenging evolutionists with the platypus. The oldest skeletons are 120 million years and they are technically among the earliest of mammals. Mammals because they feed milk to their young, yet have birdlike characteristics of ducks beak, laying eggs, webbed feet, yet have fur and tails like an otter and little claws. The problem for evolutionists is that although platypus appear to be a bird/mammal, a kind of duck/otter, they have not evolved at all from fossils dating back 120 million years. Platypus have always been platypus, yet evolutionists say our human ancestors 50 million years ago were rat like creatures which evolved into us. The nearest animal genetically to the platypus is the spiny anteater (echidna) found in Australia. However it is completely different to the platypus, lives in the dry desert, and its oldest fossils are only 15 million years, so hardly can have evolved from the platypus but is a unique egg laying mammal itself.

      Science is about going where the evidence leads. The evidence does not vilify the Bible, neither does it vilify evolution.

      • Stefano says:

        Robin Boom, I invite you to read up and understand:

        With regard to the volcano in New Zealand:
        http://creation.com/how-do-you-date-a-new-zealand-volcano

        Regarding the glass mountain:
        http://creation.com/glass-house-mountains-australia

        All dating methods are based on false assumptions:
        http://creation.com/how-dating-methods-work

        Evidently being false datings, we must re-evaluate the whole geology from top to bottom:
        http://creation.com/geology-questions-and-answers

        Regarding the marsupials after the flood:
        http://nwcreation.net/articles/marsupial_migration.html
        Every Christian should never accept of to be intimidated by scientific theories about the world’s minds, they are all spiritually blind, since they are based on the false assumption like uniformism or actualism that totally denies God and miracles.
        They deny creation 6000 years ago, but they deny Jesus resurrection 2000 years ago, they HATE God and EVERYTHING is not 100% materialistic, if you accept compromise in old earth theories and theistic evoutionism, they still HATE the resurrection of Jesus and his miracles, and cast them angrily.

        Remember, every objection can be disassembled, and TOTALLY DEBUNKED and if you do not find the answer right away you have to look for it persistently praying and holding its confidence in the Bible as long as you find the truth, NEVER give up
        .
        Only cowards betray the literalness of Scripture.
        Never betray, do not be like Esau or Judas Iscariot. You have realized that it is false biological evolution, but you have to take a step forward and understand that it is false also the age of the earth, the universe, the uniformiste assumptions Lyell and more.

        Remember, every objection can be disassembled, and if you do not find the answer right away you have to look for it persistently praying and holding its confidence in the Bible as long as you find the truth, never give up and give in.
        Only cowards betray the literalness of Scripture. Never betray, do not be like Esau or Judas Iscariot.

        Sorry for my errors, english is not my first language! 😛

        • Robin Boom says:

          Stefano

          The first link you gave regarding volcanoes proves nothing. The Rangitoto Island near Auckland they refer to we know is a results of several eruptions over the past 1500 years. It is attached to another ancient island called Mototapu, similar size which is many millions of years old and part of the original Gondwanaland. Both islands completely different formations and yet abut one another. In my previous post, the biggest eruption on Earth in the past 5,000 years (Taupo around 130AD) was hundreds of time bigger than the Rangitoto eruption from 600 years ago which your article discusses. Again I emphasize that looking at soil characteristics from the tephra flows show many thousands of years between these big eruptions. With you rigid belief as a YEC, you cannot accept this glaring observation, and YEC people either completely ignore such facts or unbelievably twist them to beyond reasonable sense to try and make them fit inside the Genesis story.

          Also you article on the unique Australian marsupials also has some glaring errors and completely wrong assumptions. The reason why many animals are similar between continents is due to migration over ice ages when continents were able to be traversed on foot, and also because of the Gondwanaland effect and continental drift. This is particularly observable in plants and again I look at some of the native trees in New Zealand compared to the native trees in north west (Queensland) Australia as proof, eg New Zealand’s largest and most famous native tree the Kauri, has an almost identical species growing in Queensland. Due to continental drift from techtonic plate movement, NZ moved away from Australia some 80-90 million years ago. Now there is nearly 2000 km of sea between the two countries from this continental drift, but with similar flora, and some of the native birds – the rattites – moa/emu, ancient lizards – tuatara, and native parrot species found in NZ will have evolved over the centuries from their Australian ancestors.

          Going back to your quoted article, if we look at the big and small cats of the America’s – jaguar, ocelot, lynx, cougar, these would have evolved from same ancestors lions, tigers, leopards evolved from, but through migration when land is connected by ice and pre continental drift they developed apart, yet their DNA is all very similar. Dogs and elephants the same. This is an obvious case for an old age Earth and one your author seemed to have overlooked. All YEC do is try to make either the continental drift very sudden post flood, or they say the migration rather than happening over tens of thousands of years, say if happened over a very short time, so really the argument the author is making against evolution is preposterous as he is saying these animals migrated from the ark in different directions over a very short period of time. Why can’t naturalists have the same argument.

          This said, I’m with Perry in that there is a huge case to be made for intelligent design using mainstream science and all of the science that has been and is being discovered. The utter complexity in all of life proves a designer for even the most casual observer, but just stop trying to fit it in the restrictive model of Genesis 1 because there is too much evidence for a much older Earth and universe. God never wrote Genesis. Humans did. So don’t make God out to be a mockery. Genesis is an ancient poetic narrative from at least two different oral traditions. You will not lose your salvation, as your relationship with God should be with His Holy Spirit at work in you. Engage with God, and don’t be restricted by Biblical dogma.

      • Mike says:

        Hi Robin. Thanks for the response. I see you are questioning my “science” credentials. I don’t work in the sciences – Im a lawyer – but I did get my undergraduate degree in earth science. So I hope thats good enough for you.

        Anyways I noticed that you already had this debate with Dr. Taz Walker of CMI.

        http://creation.com/soil-formation-challenge

        When reading this discussion, we can see you refusing to admit that you are assuming uniformitarianism in your dating of whatever rock feature you are talking about. Aside from your reluctance to admit your uniformitarian bias, what stands out is your bias against the Bible itself.

        Since you seem to oppose the Bible, I would expect such a person to look for reasons to reject it. The problem is that your positions on textual criticism are indefensible; but you seem unaware of this because you only seek arguments that support your bias against the Bible… regardless that such arguments are indefensible.

        Start studying here http://www.faithdefenders.com/index.html

        Give the Bible a chance and try not to be so closed minded.

        • Robin Boom says:

          Hi Mike.
          So you discovered one of my interactions with CMI.
          When I was younger I did take the Bible at face value and defended the literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and also held the view that the Bible as the ‘inerrant and infallible Word of God’ as that was what I had been taught.
          However I kept finding that the arguments of YEC were largely dishonest, and to use Jesus words, they ‘strained at gnats and swallowed camels’. CMI nit-pick over pathetic little things and the excuses they use for not accepting things like the speed of light from distant stars/galaxies, or ice core data are at the best weak, and at the worst dishonest. I found I was being dishonest to logic and science.
          Australian geologist Professor Ian Pilmer from Sydney University wrote a book called ‘Telling lies for God’ where he exposes some claims and arguments Christian ‘scientists’ use to argue YEC and a global flood. I found I was being dishonest to try and validate the literal Biblical accounts to the weight of evidence of a much more ancient Earth and Universe.
          We should never be afraid of finding out the Truth, as finding the Truth and Facts are about discovering the way God has made it all. Science is an ever improving pool of knowledge of God’s Creativity and my own minute understanding of science only makes me more in awe of God’s creativity and genius. Atheist scientists intrigue me that they accept the complexity of life and the universe from an innumerable number of cosmic and chemical flukes or accidents. The argument for Creation I find immensely compelling, just not the YEC model. Progressive Creationism is a much better fit. CMI’s criticisms of PC are not so much scientific, but more philosophical/theological.

          • SPOT ON.

          • Fred CB says:

            Following past Court cases that Ian Pilmer was involved in, leaves on with the impression that his credibility his highly questionable. Seems that whilst he endeavors to charge other as being liars, he is not immune from stretching the ‘truth’ himself. From what I have read, I gather that he has a lot of ‘egg-on-his-face’ from past skirmishes. FCB

            • Robin Boom says:

              His outspokenness against Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) in his book ‘Heaven and Earth’ where as a geologist he shows the current warming of the planet is just a natural cycle which has gone on for millions of years. Interestingly most YEC’s don’t accept AGW either, but wouldn’t argue Pilmer’s reasons for doing so. My point of bringing up Pilmer’s book ‘Telling Lies For God’, is that YEC and Global Flood theorists reject any science which doesn’t fit the literal Biblical paradigm, or fudge the data to fit inside it.

              Christian apologist William Lane Craig in his gentlemanly manner gives a criticism of YEC here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHye8EABbEc

      • Hugh says:

        ‘ The evidence does not vilify the Bible, neither does it vilify evolution.’
        We are faced with a mystery for which we await a reconciling theory. Meanwhile I will accept those things about which Our Lord pronounced belief.
        If I were restricted to one in-your-face topographical feature for my belief in, for instance, the Genesis Deluge account I would rest on the well-known but inexplicable fact, for some, that there are vast planation surfaces found at several levels, generally three; all over the Earth. If you google ‘planation surfaces’ you will get an explanation of how a planation surface is formed; an easily understandable explanation of the conditions necessary for the production of such a formation; but NOT three, or more, planed surfaces on escalating (or descending) levels. The surface of the earth can be planed by glaciation, but such action leaves behind features like lateral and terminal moraine, drumlins, etc. However, the surfaces which cause problems are those which have been ‘planed’, or eroded, by fast flowing rock-bearing water. Left behind, and strewn across the surface of this plain as testimony, are roundish rocks and boulders of varying sizes.
        The account of a great universal Flood, or Deluge, which surged backwards and forwards across the face of the Earth, scouring the land, repeatedly eroding and depositing layers of sediment, and the jumbled remains of forests, plants and animals, is recorded in the hundreds upon hundreds of remarkably similar stories in diverse tribes; handed down from the survivors. This tumultous flooding went on for days, weeks, months – an unimaginable scenario. Compared to this catastrophe the floods in the Tigris and elsewhere, leaving a bit of gunge, are mere splashes. The original, probably low-lying, equatorial land was completely submerged. The ‘fountains of the deep’ – great reservoirs of underground water, surged up, with cataclysmic earthquakes belching forth lava to produce the huge sheets of basalt which cover great expanses without break all over the Earth. At some stage the earth began to be pushed up in places out of the water. Such a push would be followed by great surges of rock-laden torrents which would evenly abrade some of the mountaintops and rocks at each new lowered sea-level, cutting, with equal ease, across both hard and soft layers; resulting in a planation surface. Since planation surfaces (or planed surfaces) are found throughout the world at roughly three levels, this would indicate more than three further massive upthrusts of the land, with concomitant abrasion, scouring and deposition, caused by the violently disturbed and surging waters. The scouring rocks left scattered over these great planation surfaces bear witness to the catastrophe. See creation.com/african-planation-surface.

  9. Stefano says:

    All those who despise the Bible about the creation in recent times, sooner or later will despise the Bible completely.

    As regards the speed of light is the distance of the stars is useless to make problems. Read the Bible and see that the sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day, then that’s what happened. A good plausible explanation for this may be this article: https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/starlight/does-distant-starlight-prove-the-universe-is-old/
    The simplest explanation is that the fourth day of Genesis it lasted 24 hours on the ground and took 15 billion years in outer space, for a time dilation.

    Of course the creation is a singularity, but then also the big bang is what has happened before is a singularity.

    Always remember: if the appearances are against YEC, this does not prove that YEC is false, but it proves that you have to look for a better theory to explain the appearances. Remember atheist hate everything is supernatural, if you give them ground they want other ground never satisfied. 0% compromise, 100% integrity.

    • “All those who despise the Bible about the creation in recent times, sooner or later will despise the Bible completely.”

      Put another way –

      “If you don’t believe YEC you’ll eventually hate the Bible.”

      Wow. That is quite a statement of prejudice against people who believe differently than you.

  10. Stefano says:

    “I cannot spare the time to read all the links various people post here, I hope you understand”

    Perry you’re a liar.
    You have found the time to write an horrible book full of poison that destroys the Bible and people’s faith in Genesis and can not find the time to learn something healthy? You must learn to LISTEN and not spread trash in the people of God.

    • I cannot read everything that thousands of people might come her and post a link to.

      Impossible.

      But this is my blog and I can expect that if people want to debate me – or call me names and make accusations as you have done here – that they be familiar with what I am saying. That is only fair.

      Read my book Evolution 2.0 cover to cover. And then after you have done that, I invite you to come here and refute anything I say point by point.

      Until then, stop making accusations about a book that you have not read.

      • Stefano says:

        I know your alternative theory and it’s fascinating, but it has NOTHING to do with what Christians have believed for two thousand years. If you search historically on what they believed the church fathers of the first four centuries and the Reformers insixteenth and seventeenth centuries, you’ll discevoer that they followed “creation 1.0” and not “evolution 2.0”.

        The people of God does not need your book, but only of Genesis and read it literally, and also of scientists who strive to understand how to reconcile the apparent contradictions of scientific discoveries with Scripture. Read for example the book of Woodmorappe about ark of Noah, is a very good example of true commitment and honesty on biblical integrity. This does not mean that you do not make mistakes, but at least you will act in the right direction. Remember, when people call into question the Genesis and symbolizes, and only a matter of time and abandon the whole Bible. All doctrinal positions that are not YEC, are deeply inconsistent and people notice.

  11. Stefano says:

    It is more probable that the whole church was wrong for 2000 years, or that you’re wrong and that what you teach is one of the many heresies that the Bible says will occur at the end of time? Leave evolutionary theories to atheists, God has no need of trial and error to act.

  12. Alberto Bencivenga says:

    Frankly speaking, I am unable to understand why people argue so much about a book (the Bible) that has surely so many really beautiful pages, but that is anyway just a fictional book!

  13. Alberto Bencivenga says:

    I am unable to understand how people can argue so much about a book (the Bible) that, even if it has so many relly beautiful pages, it remains, anyway, a collection of fictional tales!

  14. Stefano says:

    Isaiah 40:22 It is He who sits above the GLOBE of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers.

    Bible teach earth is a GLOBE with day (Luke 17:31) and night (Luke 17:34) in same moment. If you say Bible teach a flat earth, you are historically ignorant. http://creation.com/flat-earth-myth

    If you say Bible is fictional, i can easily answer you teaching is fictional EVERY atheist book like Origin of species of Darwin 🙂

    Why do you want at all costs to burn in hell? Do you like a lot idea to destroy forever your eternity? Is not reasonable THINK about this stuff?

    • Alberto Bencivenga says:

      Very simple why: I am not superstitious and I consider hell as another fictional invention created by the sellers of religion just to obtain power (and the money that power permits to accumulate)

  15. I don’t regard Ken Ham as the spokesmen for the science that points to a young earth. Mostly because I don’t find him very persuasive. However Ken Ham himself is not AIG which as an origination that has many fine piled highs and deeps that are leaders in their fields of science. In fact I would say making Ken Ham AIG is nothing but a political strategy designed to persuade people to not look into the thousands of articles it has amassed over the years, yes even “sacred” peered reviewed ones. These consist of laymen’s articles, semi technical and technical in all fields of science that could possibly be related to the issues of origins, biology, the earth sciences and physics.
    I’ll keep mentioning this as long as these keep showing up on Facebook. The secularist have the exact same problem with starlight as the young earth creationists. Both groups can only speculate at how we can see light from galaxies much further away than the supposed speed of light would allow. Both groups are currently stuck in the “light had to move at an infinite speed at first for us to see what we can see.” Yes honest college professors even admit it.
    The thing is, 20 years ago that was all the secularist had about their supposed ancient age of the universe and earth. The rest of it…..if you will simply follow the raw data will lead you straight to a young earth and world wide flood.

  16. Daniel Everett says:

    I saw mentioned by Robin Boom via email (can’t find it in this section sorry) that YEC/Genesis Global Flood people fudge data to fit their worldview. I should certainly hope not as this is blatantly bearing false witness (lying).

    I think such a strong accusation needs to be backed up with evidence, or it makes you look like you are scrambling for a point to make.

    • Daniel Everett says:

      My bad, I didn’t read the comment properly. Ignore the second paragraph. The first one still stand though…

    • Robin Boom says:

      One example is in Ice Core Dating. Ice core data from say the Epica drilling site at Antarctica showed ice core depths to over 3 kilometres. Antarctica is a fairly dry continent and the annual ice accumulation is around 25mm at this site and there is evidence from the ice core data from this site that the ice accumulation has been happening for around 800,000 years.
      CMI dismisses this evidence with the response that it is in contradiction to the true Biblical historical record, and therefore must be wrong. Their main argument is that such a build up may not have been uniform as it has been for the past 500 years. Allowing some sort of variation, it would have to be colossal at a grand scale to ever build up 3 km of ice in 4500 years. Its a case of rejecting the obvious and embracing the absurd. Starlight and Time is another classic example of rejecting the obvious and embracing the absurd, just to make it fit within the literal Biblical time-frame.

  17. Roger Drake says:

    I don’t trust your argument. Scientist have been lying to us for years to come up with bogus evidence to support their ridiculous “proven” assertions that macro evolution and long time spans are absolutely true. I say let the CRI scientist and other reputable scientist look at your evidence. Seems to me I read about this experiment many years ago and it was shot down by the use of logic and common sense. Have a nice day.

  18. Tim Rider says:

    The fundamental key issue which everyone seems to be dancing around here is the notion that the time frame over which God works is a function of His ability. God created time-he is not subject to His creation, therefore he is not subject to time (especially the time dimension that defines our domain).

    YEC people are incapable of (or unwilling to) understand this important distinction, and are consequently threatened by the implication that God is somehow diminished by any suggestion that he took longer than 144 hours to create the universe and everything in it. Did he work nights, or just in the daytime? And what is night for him, since night for us is just the rotation of the earth?

    The fact is, that the time frame over which God works is a function not of our time dimension, but rather his choice! After all, he took 12 hours to move a little water out of the way so his people could safely pass through to safety. Couldn’t he have done that a little faster if he chose to??

    It is incorrect to render an age for Yom as any less literal than any of the other time periods (there are several) that Yom is used to convey in the Old Testament. They are distinctly different, but equally literal. The day age model is every bit as literal as a 24 hour one is.

    Another fallacy is the tendency to falsely interpret the ‘one day is as a thousand years’ as an equation. Peter includes ‘a watch in the night’ in quoting this passage. Three different values cannot be equal!! God is making the much larger point here that distinctions between time periods in our time dimension have no significance in the extradimensional realm of his domain! It is horribly incorrect to force fit 1,000 years into a day. Much error arises from this nonsense.

    There is also a lot of error that arises from the assumption that the genealogies are to be viewed as a family tree. There are not nor were ever intended to be. There are huge gaps when compared side by side, and it is on this fallacy that Ussher and Lightfoot compiled their faulty 6,000 year time frame. These gaps are not mistakes. Predisessor would be more accurate than ‘begat’, since these were not intended to be treated as direct family trees. There is a great deal of literature dealing with this.

    There is also a misunderstanding of death as spoken of in Romans. There are four kinds of death Paul refers to, physical death, spiritual death (separation from God), death to sin, and death to the Law. Adam and Eve experienced instant separation from God when they sinned (spiritual death). This is not physical death.

    God created and set into motion the four fundamental forces of physics at the moment of creation. These forces, including light, must remain constant in order to result in the precisely fine tuned rate of expansion of the universe, star formation, nuclear fusion in the cores of stars to produce all of the elements of the periodic table (all of which are necessary for complex human life, including those normally thought to be toxic, in minute amounts), so that we could eventually have a perfect environment on earth to support human life. These fundamental forces cannot change, or we don’t get the universe we now have.

    Astronomers are looking back in time when they peer into the heavens. They can now look back to that very point where light separated from darkness. In so doing, they can observe the speed of light at various points throughout the history of the universe. By measuring redshift they can observe the speed of light at any point along the way, and it has not changed. He has established the ordinances of the heavens and the earth and has not changed them. Jer. 33:25

    YEC is a doctrinal tare sown by the Enemy to destroy the credibility of God’s Word, and has done so to millions of those who were honestly and sincerely seeking the truth.

    Accurate exegesis of all 1,600 creation passages throughout the old and new testaments and the evidence God has left literally strewn from one end of the universe to the other, overwhelmingly testify to the phenomenal creative process over the last 13.7 billion years.

    If we cannot get honest seekers of the truth past Gen. 1, how will we ever get them down the Romans road to salvation??

  19. Robin boom says:

    Well said. Excellent stuff

  20. Daniel Everett says:

    Hi Perry,

    Tonight I saw Ken Ham’s Ark project on TV. He said its purpose is to educate people about YEC and also to make them think about what Christianity (YEC or otherwise) means in today’s world. Bill Nye was on the same story and he ridiculed it by saying, amongst other things, that the money spent on it could have been better spent on public services.

    What do you think about this? Do you think it is a positive witness designed to showcase the glory of God? Or something as useless as Bill Nye says?

    • I have little respect for Ken Ham’s science.

      • Daniel Everett says:

        I am aware of this. I was saying as an evangelical tool, could it be useful?

        If you don’t think so, I think an explanation longer than “his science sucks” is in order.

        • I have explained many places on this site the problems with Ken Ham. You can search his name and find lots of statements.

          Excellent recent book:
          http://smile.amazon.com/Grand-Canyon-Monument-Ancient-Earth/dp/0825444217

          YEC backfires very badly, because the earth is quite demonstrably very very old. (If a star is 100 million light years away, when did the light leave the star?)

          Ken Ham is rigidly devoted to a very particular way of reading the Bible. One that is at odds with hundreds of years of accumulated scientific knowledge. His specific interpretation is so important to him that he would rather completely alter the science to fit his interpretation, than the other way around. This completely destroys the credibility of many Christians with non-Christian people who are educated enough to know basic science. Ken Ham’s organization does more harm than good, in my opinion. The other problem is that when kids get old enough and educated enough to realize the problems with YEC – then combined with Ken’s insistence that the ONLY way to read Genesis 1 is his way, many simply walk away from faith because they cannot honestly claim to believe something that is obviously false. This happens to thousands of Christian kids each year. My brother was one of them.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *