geocreationism.com

“If Young Earth Creationists are out of their mind, it is for the sake of God; if Old Earth Creationists are in their right mind, it is for you.” — 2 Corinthians 5:13

Okay, I’m kidding.  People who believe in a young earth are not insane, but they are out of their mind… in the way 2 Corinthians 5:13 says.  Oh wait.  That isn’t really 2 Corinthians 5:13, is it?  Sorry about that.  Couldn’t resist.  As much as I emphasize that YECs have admirable faith and should not be converted to being Evolutionists at the cost of their faith and fellowship, the very tension of the Creation debate sometimes finds its release in potentially offensive jokes.  So for that, I apologize.  …

One of the primary criticisms of Old Earth views of the universe stems from the introduction of death into the world.  According to a young earth perspective, God created the world perfect, and in that perfection there was no sin, and therefore no death.  Death was introduced by Adam’s and Eve’s disobedience in the garden.  Therefore, because death was not in the world before the fall, evolution would be impossible, because the theory of evolution is based on fossils that are thought to have died long before the fall.  If the reasoning is correct, then this contradiction is clear proof that evolution is a fallacy, that the earth is young, and God truly means to communicate that in scripture.  It is …

Thus far, I have been spending this year in a study on righteousness.  My reason for doing so on an Evolutionary Creationist website is that a lot of answers to my Ultimate Questions for God seemed wrapped up in the concept of righteousness, and so I wanted to make sure that truly understood it, the best that I could.  And so I’m going through the verses on righteousness.  Well, in studying the “righteousness” verse of Jeremiah 33, I came upon the following passage, which to me speaks directly to creation, and indirectly to the age of our earth [emphasis added]:
 19 The word of the LORD came to Jeremiah: 20 “This is what the LORD says: ‘If …

Okay, this isn’t exactly a verse in the bible, but I wanted to get your attention.

As I’ve been doing my word study on righteousness, thoughts naturally gravitate back to Evolution, Creationism, and Geocreationism. I’ve been reading this great book which I cannot find in my morning haze, but it advances the common argument that God’s testimony is in scripture and in science.  In other words, what we discover about the world, is knowledge that God wants us to have… and why wouldn’t He?  I mean, anything we learn about Him, whether it be how He saved us from our sins, or created the world in which live, is more knowledge about Him and His love for us.  Why wouldn’t I want …

Reading Elihu’s speech in Job 37, it struck me that it was immediately followed by Job 38, which contains one of the Creation stories in the Bible that is consistent with both the ancient pagan creation myths, and paradoxically modern science.  You can read more about The Creation Account in Job.

What struck me is the contrast between how Elihu attempts to challenge Job with Creation, versus how God does, and how that applies to today.
Job 37 

 14 “Listen to this, Job;
       stop and consider God’s wonders.

 15 Do you know how God controls the clouds
       and makes his lightning flash?

 16 Do you know how the clouds hang poised,
       those wonders of him who is …

Over the last 2 years of studying and writing Geocreationism, I have slowly come to accept evolution more than before.  Though I still have questions in my mind, I keep finding more reasons to believe that God a created a universe in which life would evolve according to His predetermined plan.

Early on in my blog, I found a post entitled Mass Delusion - 10 Reasons Why the Majority of Scientists Believe in Evolution.  I never responded to it, but at the time as I was merely sympathetic to Evolution.  While I am not full-on advocate for Evolution, it is the most logically choice to me, and fits my interpretation of scripture better than anything else I’ve studied.  This …

In “Beyond the Firmament” (Review) - Genesis is Literal, I write about an interesting phenomenon.  It would seem that Moses — some would dispute whether it’s Moses, but that’s beside the point for now — wrote what he thought was a historically accurate account of Creation.  We now know that he was wrong — it was not historically accurate.  However, as GJG of BTF points out, when we put on our Moses hat, and try to view the world as the ancient Hebrews did, we realize that what Moses echoed the account with which they were already familiar, but with the added detail that God is the one who did …

In my previous post, Reflections: What is Life? Choosing to Live in the Light, I developed an analogy for life.  The analogy is that of a common landscape with a shadow cast upon it. We all live on the same landscape, though some is in God’s light, and some is not. 

The features of the landscape are generally the same everywhere you go.  Figuratively speaking, there are mountains, lakes, oceans, even cities, but once you know the rules of one feature, the rules will apply to them all.  Again by analogy, rules might include the physical, like gravity; or the logical, like math.  These rules work the same everywhere, …

I have just completed reading Gordon J. Glover’s excellent book, “Beyond the Firmament”.  It was very helpful in helping me clarify my views on Creation and Genesis 1, and has made me open to the idea of abandoning the umbrella of “Theistic Evolution”, in favor of just unabashedly saying “Evolution”.  This is no small feat.

I have documented on this blog a scriptural basis for seeing Jesus at Creation, and His involvement in it.  I stand by it, but I realize that I must soften some of my language.  I have historically sounded like the insights I write of was God’s own message.  I want to clarify that I do not believe that is true.  On the contrary, I agree …

A constant premise of Geocreationism for me has been that Moses wrote Genesis 1 in a literal fashion, and that we should interpret it likewise.  In the last six months, I modified that slightly when I learned of the scientific perspectives of mankind at the time, and had my eyes opened to Moses’ consistency with that perspective in his writing.  Did that negate my premise?  Not entirely.  Moses still meant Genesis 1 literally.  He just did not realize the actual scientific details of what he wrote.  Instead, he took the truth, and described it in the clearest terms that he could… which were the scientific terms and imagery of his time.  Determining what really happened from what Moses has a been like solving a riddle, but once you back out of his …