GeoCreationism.com

 3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water.
To my Young Earth Creationist friends, verse 5 is clear evidence that the earth is young.  Why?  Because Evolutionists do not believe that the earth was formed out of water and by water.  On the other hand, Genesis 1:2 says this about …

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 …

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 …

One of the main criticisms that Young Earth Creationists (YECs) lobby against Old Earth Creationists (OECs) is that scientific methods of aging ancient rocks and fossils are unreliable.  Therefore, the reasoning goes, don’t rely on it.  In fact, if you are trying to age anything you think is older than 10,000 years old, don’t even try.  After all, according to scripture, nothing was around back then.  If you try using methods that suggest ages older than 10,000 years old, your findings will be filled with contradictions and inconsistencies, so do not be surprised when you find them.  You can try reconciling them, but don’t bother.  After all, if you already know the earth is younger than 10,000 years old, then what do you gain trying explain why …

My theory of Geocreationism is that the Days of creation can be mapped to geologic eras, making it similar to (or yet another flavor of) Day Age Theory.  In that vein, Day 1 occurred about 3.9 Ga, around the time of the last large meteor strike against the early earth.  Day 2 was some time between 3.9 Ga and 3.5 Ga, when the oceans had finally reformed from their last meteoric vaporizing 3.9 Ga.  Day 3, the creation of land and plants, occurred approximately 2.4 Ga, when plate tectonics began.  Day 4 was about 1.9 Ga, when Oxygen levels reached high enough levels for the sun, moon, and starts to be visible in the firmament.  This means that Day 3 could …

A reader David asked some excellent questions that I believe are of general interest to the blog, and so I think it appropriate to answer the questions here. 

> The idea of the Holy Spirit choosing to move to the
> other side of the earth to experience the day is still
> difficult for me to grasp. The Holy Spirit is spirit (duh!).
> He is everywhere at once if I understand the concept of
> omnipresence. Now, much greater minds than mine
> have been wrestling with Genesis for thousands of
> years. Nevertheless, what about this?

The question of the Holy Spirit’s omnipresence is an interesting one.  Well let’s first consider a similar question.  Is Jesus omnipresent? I think that’s an easier one to tackle.  Clearly, …

“And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night.  And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” - Genesis 1:5

This is the first sunset and sunrise that God experienced on the earth.  We know it was a sunset/sunrise because the context is day and night, the establishment of the light side of the earth’s sky and the dark.  We know it was God experiencing it based on the supposition that Jesus witnessed creation, because the Holy Spirit was hovering over the waters with Jesus, and because Jesus was God’s instrument of creation.  However, the creating of light in the sky surely took more than one solar day, so how could this be Jesus’ …

“And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night.  And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” - Genesis 1:5

This is a key verse to understanding the events recorded in the Creation account.  It builds on the context presented in verses 1 to 3, adding just enough detail for us to understand what actually constitutes a “day” of Creation.

We know that in Genesis 1:1 the terrestrial bodies and the earth were initially created; scientifically, we know this to be 4.5 billion years ago (Ga).  We know that in Genesis 1:2, the earth had not yet undergone the “formation” of God’s pronouncements, and the earth had no life.  We also know that the …

Genesis 1:4 - And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness

We know from Genesis 1:3 that God had Jesus remove any hindrance to neutralizing the darkness over the deep.  We also know that Jesus did it, and the light in the sky began to grow.  The scripture gives no indication how long the process took, though scientifically we know it could have been over a billion years.  What we do know is that the process, the “letting” of light, had begun, and at some point God saw the light, and He saw that it was good.

Also, God separated the light from the darkness.  This is interesting, apparently God wasn’t replacing all of …

Then God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light. - Genesis 1:3
I discussed this verse in detail in the word study on “Let”.  The gist of it is that the word “be” in God’s pronouncement is as well suited for describing the removal of some hindrance to light, as it is for describing the sudden appearance of it.  Also, because the darkness was “over the deep” in verse 2, we know the light in verse 3 was “over the deep” as well. Therefore, interpreting God’s statement as “Let any hindrance to seeing light over the deep be removed” is appropriate, as long as other geological and theological evidence exists to support, or even suggest, it.

For the geological …