Any young earth creationists out there?

  • Thread starter Thread starter semper_catholicus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I respect that some people find evolution to be incompatible with their faith. Everyone has the right to their own religious belief. As long as people are not insisting that Catholics who accept evolution are less Catholic or at odds with the Catholic faith, because that is not true.

However, from a scientific perspective… the “science” supporting young earth creationism is quite ridiculous. God gave us reason, and using this reason to examine all the scientific evidence, I cannot accept young earth creationism. I would have to do a lot of mental gymnastics and be dishonest with myself.

The Church Fathers were our fathers in faith… not scientists.
 
I believe in a young earth as I think scripture seems to try put that position forward. There is no difference between the Hebrew words for day, year or any aspect of time in genesis as compared to other parts of scripture. Further I think the whole truth of salvation history rests on Adam and Eve being literal people.

Further I find comfort in the testimony of the divine visions of the saints. Yes it’s private revalation but I think many people take approved private revelation to mean “do not believe” when in fact it actually means “The Church has no reason to doubt it but you don’t have to believe it”.

Anyway Bleased Anne Catherine Emmerich had a Vision on the history of man up until the time of Jesus. Of the creation she says this:

”I saw these false computations of the pagan priests at the same time that I beheld Jesus teaching on the Sabbath at Aruma. Jesus, speaking before the Pharisees of the Call of Abraham and his sojourn in Egypt, exposed the errors of the Egyptian calendar. He told them that the world had now existed 4028 years. When I heard Jesus say this, He was Himself thirty-one years old.”

She also comments on the creation:
When in my sixth year I reflected on the first article of the Apostles’ Creed, “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth,” there passed before my soul innumerable pictures of the creation of Heaven and earth. I saw the Fall of the angels, the creation of the earth and Paradise, that of Adam and Eve, and the Fall of man.

I saw Adam created, not in Paradise, but in the region in which Jerusalem was subsequently situated. I saw him come forth glittering and white from a mound of yellow earth, as if out of a mold. The sun was shining and I thought (I was only a child when I saw it) that the sunbeams drew Adam out of the hillock. He was, as it were, born of the virgin earth. God blessed the earth, and it became his mother. He did not instantly step forth from the earth. Some time elapsed before his appearance. He lay in the hillock on his left side, his arm thrown over his head, a light vapor covering him as with a veil. I saw a figure in his right side, and I became conscious that it was Eve, and that she would be drawn from him in Paradise by God. God called him. The hillock opened, and Adam stepped gently forth. There were no trees around, only little flowers. I had seen the animals also, coming forth from the earth in pure singleness, the females separate from the males.

Near the tree by the water arose a hill. On it I saw Adam reclining on his left side, his left hand under his cheek. God sent a deep sleep on him and he was rapt in vision. Then from his right side, from the same place in which the side of Jesus was opened by the lance, God drew Eve. I saw her small and delicate. But she quickly increased in size until full grown. She was exquisitely beautiful. Were it not for the Fall, all would be born in the same way, in tranquil slumber.

The hill opened, and at Adam’s side arose a crystalline rock, formed apparently of precious stones. At Eve’s, lay a white valley covered with something like fine white pollen.
 
Last edited:
The point is, none of them taught 13.7 billion years.
No. That is most definitely not the point. This thread is not about what I believe, but what you believe. You have said that you (in common with 50% of the church fathers adduced) believe in six literal days for creation, and no doubt that the sun was not created until after fruit trees, and that Noah took all the ‘kinds’ of animals on to the ark. Stick to that. Do not engage with evidence to the contrary. Your belief is faith-based, not evidence-based, and that’s fine.
 
Why does the universe have to be young for God to have created it in six days
 
Well, the theory of evolution is definitely incompatible with any true Christian belief. For instance, a person is either evolutionist or believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans and biological fathers of us all. The former is only a theory, not proven (and actually illogical IMO), whereas the latter is a revelation made by God and kept by generations over millennia. Both require faith.
 
No. That is most definitely not the point. This thread is not about what I believe, but what you believe. You have said that you (in common with 50% of the church fathers adduced) believe in six literal days for creation, and no doubt that the sun was not created until after fruit trees, and that Noah took all the ‘kinds’ of animals on to the ark. Stick to that. Do not engage with evidence to the contrary. Your belief is faith-based, not evidence-based, and that’s fine
Why do people ignore the big red flag here, the elephant placed intentionally in the middle of the room?

The Bible has two versions of creation with different creation orders.

That these conflicting accounts were both included (though divine inspiration) should be a clear indication the creation story is more figurative than literal.
 
Well, it sort of is. All the Church Fathers believed that the Earth was less than 6000 years old. We can all agree that, no matter what model you believe in, God created everything. the difference lies in time basically. I believe that the earth is a lot younger than most people think.
 
I’m a creationist but in NO WAY can I ever claim to be a young earth creationist.
 
You got to stop saying that all the church fathers believed this or that when your only source is answers in genesis
 
I mean just because all the church fathers thought earth was in the center of the universe doesn’t mean that they were right about it.
 
I’m pretty sure all the church fathers believed we were in the center of the universe. Does that mean they’re right despite the FACT that the earth isn’t in the center
 
Bleased Anne Catherine Emmerich
Her writings are extremely problematic for various reasons.

Not only are “her writings” private revelation - they are unapproved private revelation.
 
Last edited:
So much circular reasoning in this thread.

Young earth creationism is true because the fathers said it’s true and because the fathers said it’s true then young earth creationism is true

No one else has a problem with that?
 
Well, the theory of evolution is definitely incompatible with any true Christian belief. For instance, a person is either evolutionist or believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans and biological fathers of us all. The former is only a theory, not proven (and actually illogical IMO), whereas the latter is a revelation made by God and kept by generations over millennia. Both require faith.
Quote from Pope John Paul II:
In his encyclical Humani generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII has already affirmed that there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith regarding man and his vocation, provided that we do not lose sight of certain fixed points. … Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory

Secondly, what is a scientific theory? It is not some random guess. A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is supported by repeated experiments, evidence, and scientific testing.

Yes, everything requires faith, but faith doesn’t have to contradict reason or be blind. Just as there is a lot of evidence that points to God’s existence, there is also a lot of evidence that supports evolution. The fossil record, homologous structures, the results of artificial selection and selective breeding, rapid changes in the characteristics of a species following environmental changes, the global distribution of organisms, DNA and the genetic code reflecting the shared ancestry of life, I could go on and on… there is geological, biological, chemical and physical evidence of evolution.

Have you studied the evidence for evolution?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top