In this thread I am willing to bend over backwards to find agreement.Ã‚Â I will drop all my presuppositions at the door.Ã‚Â I will not be presenting an evolutionary explanation, or any other (apart from one, see the next time I mention 'Devonian' later).
With all due respect, I find that hard to believe. You'd be the very first Evolutionist-atheist to do it. So we creationists would have to record this date on our calenders.
There will be no attempt to draw any conclusions from this, I will not attempt make any comments about dating of these things.
You may find it odd me being YEC, but I have no problems with age dating. Why?
Science cannot prove that the laws of time, nor the laws of physics stayed the same through out time. In fact they themselves are willing to bend these laws to make their own ideas work. Like a black hole having gravity so strong that it is able to compress all the matter of the universe into a dot. And even stop time. Who's to say that some of these conditions may have existed outside the black hole?
If you wish me to take on the 6,000 year age of the Earth and the idea that the global flood caused all these things, then I will even go that far (though technically that is unfair because it means you get to have theories and explanations whilst I don't).
If you were to actually do this, you'd be the first evo I have ever met willing to step out of his own box to see what it's like to be in the creation box (walk in another person's shoes). Evos are so afraid of this because they think it requires conversion of some sort, which is far from the truth. To become a believer requires conversion, to see it from a creationists view point does not.
This is also why they will demonize the box creationists are in while making their own look totally wonderful. Fear makes one want to never go near the other box, so therefore it works as a good box lock where they lock themselves in never peering outside because the creationist monster might get you.
The only caveat I have is that I will use geological and biological jargon, such as 'Devonian' or 'Prototaxites'.Ã‚Â In each case I will use these without prejudice.Ã‚Â I merely use them as convenient names.Ã‚Â Now I will give the one explanarion I have allowed myself.Ã‚Â It is called the Devonian because the rocks were first found in Devon, England.
Here are my points again:
1) There are layers of rock that contain fossils.
2) Particular fossils are always found together in rocks .
3) It is possible to identify a rock formation from the fossils found in it, for example Devonian rocks can be identified around the world by the particular fossils found within those rocks such as Prototaxites which is characteristic of the Middle Devonian period.
4) The layers of rock with different fossils are nearly always found in the same relation to different layers (for example fossils of the Devonian Prototaxites is always found in layers below the Carboniferous Cycadophyta)
5) In the cases where the layers are found the opposite way round, obvious distortion of the rocks are seen.
Which of these can we agree on?
In God's word it says that God aged the universe with His spoken word.
2pet 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old,
and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
Now why do this? If you were God and had to create a working universe in 6 days. Would not the age of each functioning created thing matter in the equation of making it all work?
Example: Would a "new star" (our sun) be better, or one that is aged and is at it's stable point in it's life to where it won't at some point freeze us or fry us? Would a new molten earth support life, or a aged one where it is cool, stable, has a strong magnetic field to deflect solar wind?
You see under creation laws of the first 6 days. Time existed but age was not part of time. So time could pass but "nothing aged". This is because before man sinned "everything was eternal" including how time works.
1) Time + age = not eternal.
2) Time - age = eternal.
So the first 6 days was "time minus age" because sin did not happen yet. Now imagine if you will a dimension where time passes but nothing ever ages. What would be different, and how would it effect the laws we know that aging is a part of?
So you see as long as we try to explain creation with the laws we currently understand it won't make sense. You have to go beyond that and be able to peer into what another dimension would be like where nothing aged, was born, or ever died.
Think of it like like a Star Trek movie. Where the ship open a rift that sucks them into another dimension where time exists, but aging does not. Could they have babies when the cell splitting would not even happen?
So you see age (creating with age already intact) becomes part of the equation for the creation, because the creation was ageless (time passes but nothing ages).
So the earth was created 4.6 billion years old (aged by God's word upon creation of it) 6,000 years ago.
Now what this means is that there are 2 laws to how things can age.
1) Is through passing of time after man sinned.
2) Is by God's word because in a ageless dimension it's required.Here is an illustration of how, when the laws change, it changes how you do things.
Let's say you were going to cook some rice. The instructions say you have to bring water to a boil and let it cook for so many minutes. Now at sea level, the boiling point of water is around 215 F. Now if you were to enter a a chamber that doubled the barometric pressure (2 atmospheres). Could you cook the rice the same way? Or would you have to adjust to the laws of how water boils at 2 atmospheres?
So evolution working in a dimension where aging always existed seems feasible. But like the boiling water, if you step into a dimension where the laws of aging no longer exists it changes everything.