Thank you all for participating in the discussion and sharing your views whether we agree or not, I appreciate all of your precious feedback. I encourage everyone to speak their mind as they see fit. 🙂
A couple of remarks, first I do not think that the days in genesis, represent ages. As you also noticed, as far yom is concerned, where it does also mean more than a day, I am simply not trying to prove that because I realize that it is unlikely so. I am not arguing with any biblical verses in genesis to mean differently than six literal days. My point is that the story of Genesis is not talking about the age of earth at all. My contention is that is using poetic structure’s to emphasize creation and perhaps make the story more easy to remember, with categorical creation details divided into segments, to be sung and told again to future generations. I would be intellectually dishonest if I do what I am asking you not to do.
Furthermore I also believe that the Genesis authors believed that the six days actually meant six literal days, just like they thought that the Sun and the moon orbit around the Earth and not vice-versa. Their knowledge was limited to their day and age. That is perhaps likely so, because in Exodus 20 when the genesis creation account is again summarized they follow the original six day construct, and that is also for the sake of consistency.
Mark 10:6 is actually no problem. OEC is a pretty broad range of beliefs which have no trouble keeping the integrity of these views intact.
Its not just fossils, its actually a huge number of different dating methods that have led science to calculate the age of the earth. And contrary to popular belief, these are not arbitrary. The decay of particles is one of the main reasons we know that they are correct about the age of the Earth and universe, e.g
1. The red-shift of distant objects (Doppler effect) indicates that the universe is at least 14 billion years old.
2. Star color luminosity.
3. The decay of Uranium-238, seen in its Spectral line.
4. Supernova standard candles.
5. Globular Clusters.
6. Gravitational lensing.
7. Light travel-time based on quasar-light sources. (either there is a false deceptive light out there or it is actually 5.9 billion light years away )
8. Cepheid variable stars.
9. Expanding photosphere indicates that at least some stars are a minimum of 9 billion years old.
10. Star stream interactions, all these show that the Earth is more than and close to 9-13 billion years old.
And these are all different ways of measuring the age of the universe and they all come to the same conclusion – that the universe is a minimum of billions of year old. These are all different techniques, independent fro each other, they all can not be wrong at the same time. Plus unlike it is commonly believed, these techniques do not give exact dates but ranges wherein which scientists tend to find accuracy.
Then there are tectonic plates to consider, ice cores from Antarctica which are at least 400,000 old. I still have heard no plausible scenario where Adam could have named all animals in 24 hours. I still have yet to hear a good cause for the teeth and claw problem and I still have not seen a good plausible response as to why at the microscopic level, bacterial bodies fight other bodies, did that happen after the fall too? Why does a scorpion has a sting or why does the porcupine has thorns on its skin? Why do some fish have camouflager ability to hide, and why did not goats changed to be predators after the fall? Why does a sting ray is poisonous to begin with. There was no magic puff that suddenly made a snake became poisonous, it is part of its DNA, YEC model has no answer when it comes to this. Plus the scriptures do not hint at any change that might have taken place after God had finished with His creation. It is implied but never supported or proven from scriptures.
I would argue that the death in the fall of man is not physical death but spiritual. For to be precise, that is what exactly happened. In fact if anything, look at the scriptures yourself, Adam and Eve didn’t die physically but spiritually. In fact when the serpent talked to them about death he was pointing to physical death whereas God had pointed to Spiritual death.
Plus, I can not imagine a planet where humans never die physically, it will soon fill up our planet if that happens, not to mention we would seriously disrupt the natural food chain and order. Vegetation would be gone faster than you can see cheese. In conclusion I believe death did exist before the fall. To say otherwise from scriptures is again reading it out of context. The account of death in Romans, where Christ and Adam are compared is from a theological point, not a scientific one. Plus the account in Romans never truly render death as physical death and to read it as physical death is to proof-text what we already believe to be true.
I think that we make scriptures even the authority on areas it is not even addressing and then we make it part of our belief. And that is wrong.
In the end I will say this, I do not think this is a big deal for faith, I respect people who disagree with me, here. It is in Christ we are all one and from that respect these things are trivial. To be honest I will be fine if one day we can prove that God made it in 6 seconds rather than 6 days too. in that case I will be a ultra YEC, and I will have no problem with that but I need solid ground to rest my ideas upon. So far I do not think YEC provides a good one. There is a problem occurring in our world, Christians are somewhat inching away from natural sciences. I do not think this is uniform everywhere but I can not help but notice a growing number of people who actually refute evidence which is proven. It saddens me because in reality faith is not a matter of natural sciences. The way I see it, the more we understand the more we learn about God and his ways. Faith is not just a biblical output of beliefs, no, not by a long mile. It is to trust God to the best of our understanding and be honest about it. But I am afraid that it has been portrayed as something quite different for some time now and is a stumbling block for many who leave faith because what they see as evidence is so alien to our teachings that we seem ancient. Why? because we are totally reluctant to admit science in our understanding. And the problem is we are not open to give any margin, because we can not trust “man’s word for it” at any cost. There is so much wrong with this line of thinking that I am baffled at times at the amount of contradictions it can spur.
What a sad thing. We have made science vs. religion a sort of battleground agenda to follow. While I agree many of you out there are not like this, not everyone is anti-science but I can also assure you that many are doing just that.
My hope is that Christians do not alienate themselves from what we have learned and are still learning about the world and the universe and let us be patient and trust God. At the end of the day, God is neither bound by billions of years or six days. I just do not find much evidence for six days. And the good news is, it has never hampered my faith at all, if anything I am more fascinated by the intricacy of God’s design and ways. It astounds me and leaves me in awe.