Creationist Ken Ham Slams Pat Robertson for His Old Earth Comments

article_images/creation_582289422.jpg

Ham calls Robertson's comments "destructive teaching."

Ken Ham of the Creationist Museum is slamming televangelist Pat Robertson because of his recent comments that the Bible does not support the theory of a young earth. Robertson, answering a question from a viewer on The 700 Club, said the existence of dinosaurs is evidence that the earth is more than 6,000 years old.

“Look, I know people will probably try to lynch me when I say this, but Bishop [James] Ussher—God bless him—wasn’t inspired by the Lord when he said it all took 6,000 years. It just didn’t. … And you go back in time, you’ve got radiocarbon dating, you’ve got all these things, and you’ve got the carcasses of dinosaurs frozen in time out in the Dakotas. And so there was a time that these giant reptiles were on the earth, and it was before the time of the Bible.”

“So don’t try to cover it up and make like everything was 6,000 years. That’s not the Bible. That’s Bishop Ussher,” Robertson continued. “And so if you fight revealed science you’re going to lose your children, and I believe in telling them the way it was.”

Ham made statements published on his Answers in Genesis website and on Facebook responding to Robertson’s comments: “Not only do we have to work hard to not let our kids be led astray by the anti-God teaching of the secularists, we have to work hard to not let them be led astray by compromising church leaders like Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson gives more fodder to our enemies.” Ham was referring to the secularists and atheists who applauded Robertson online for his statements.

“Such leaders — including Pat Robertson — have a lot to answer to the Lord for one day,” Ham lamented. “Such leaders are guilty of putting stumbling blocks in the way of kids and adults in regards to believing God’s word and the Gospel.”

Read more about the controversy at The Christian Post and Christian News.

 

Please Note: We reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, uncivil and off-topic. Read a detailed description of our Comments Policy.
  • John Munro

    If some one could kidnap Pat for one day do not allow him to speak.
    He would be cured.

  • PastorCarla

    All I know is when we begin to question Genesis (the beginning), everything else becomes suspect. If God said it took Him 6 days and He rested on the 7th, I believe Him at His Word in spite of all – even my man Pat

  • PSC502

    Wait a second the bible does not say how long Adam and Eve were in the garden after the 7th day of creation. It could have been billions of years! YES i think we can trust the times laid out in the Word since the fall as around 6000 years but before then we have no idea how much time past after the 7 days of creation and the fall. Man was eternal before sin and so Adam could have lived a long time before he sinned. The Bible isn’t clear how long this period of time was just how long it was since the fall till now. We have made doctrine out of assumption to much, here scripture is not clear. We don’t need another four cornered earth doctrine set up as a pillar of truth and then it get’s shot down and God’s Word ends up looking false because we assumed we knew it all.

    • AC502

      Adam & Eve living billions of years? Come now we can do better! Not billions, millions or even thousands. 930 years were the total years of Adam’s life (Genesis 5.5). The Bible doesn’t say how long Eve lived. Where God has spoken, we should speak and where He has not we should not.

      • PSC502

        That does seem like the proper translation of that passage(5:5) “all the days,” in the KJV. I had thought it was dated from the fall, as many times as Iv’e read the OT and in multiple translations I just got that wrong, I would say that still doesn’t mean the earth is only 6000 years old though. We don’t know how much time passed from Genesis 1:2 and 1:3, did God create a formless earth then much later begin the 7 days of creation? I think it is possible to get that out of Gen. 1:4 where God calls the light good, not the things in verse 2. And without the light of the day and the darkness of the night what would have been called a day or the passing of time since God had created the heavens and the earth? Just giving my thoughts. It’s is still impossible for science to be right and the bible to be right about the age of the earth if they disagree.

        • AC502

          You’re absolutely right in regard to the relationship between science and the Bible. There is and always will be conflict between them, mainly because God wants us to Him completely at His word and have faith in Him (for it is impossible to please Him without it–Hebrews 11.1-6). God has not given us all the evidence for the age of the earth that science requires. The discipline of science REQUIRES empirical evidence that must be inconclusive…much like evidence in a court of law. They don’t (nor do those who believe in a young earth) have all the FACTS. That’s why I go to the Scriptures first and foremost.

          I’m enjoying this dialogue and have many resources at home for you to consider. I’m presently at work on my phone so please bear with me. But off the top of my head let me encourage you to visit the websites of the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis in regard to these issues. I’m not a scientist myself, but these sites have many godly men and women that bring education to these issues while glorifying God….2Tm. 3.16-17

          • John Peters

            Sorry. There will never be a conflict between the Bible and true science. Because true science is exactly what the word means, “knowledge.” God’s Word never contradicts true knowledge. However, evolution is not science. Why? Every scientist knows that science must be observable and repeatable. If you succeed in producing a given alloy once, you cannot build any true science off of it unless you can consistently do so again. Face it : evolution is not observable or repeatable. So evolution is not science. Interesting, eh? And yet, every secular scientist will present evolution as though it were true science! What is it the Bible says, “…oppositions of science, falsely so called?”

          • PSC502

            I agree and would believe science would be faking somethings if they came to non-biblical conclusions, I’m just concerned that that we sometimes make doctrine out of things the bible doesn;’t say is 100% absolutly a certain way.

          • John Peters

            But the point is that evolution isn’t science at all. Neither is creationism. It’s a position of faith. The creation of the world is not observable or repeatable. So we can’t prove or disprove what happened then, because there could be a variable that we are dis-regarding. Ie.: God. If you say that millions of years have to be in the creation account because the world has certain features, or the stars 10 million light years away are visible, or whatever else it may be, you are leaving out the element of God – God could have created it that way, and I believe He did! But whatever stand you take, it’s a position of faith. And I put my faith in the Word of God, nothing added to it.

          • AC502

            Amen…You’re preaching to the choir about evolution. It’s not science at all, yet it’s everywhere(schools at every level, discovery, TLC, History Channel etc.) The old earth community approaches these sources as the gospel with comments like: “You need to watch the Discovery Channel to learn what’s going on.”
            I appreciate your input into the discussion and welcome more. The ongoing conflict with science and the Bible is a long discussion because science is constantly learning and developing more insight through the scientific method. I believe by the faith God gave me when He converted me that He created the heavens and earth in 6 days and a rest. I believe also that Jesus and Peter walked on water, that Jesus was born of a virgin, that He resurrected and ascended into heaven after paying our sin debt on the cross. Science can’t handle that. Science can’t handle the supernatural because miracles are just that…miraculous and beyond duplication to prove their truth. Pat Robertson can’t handle that God created the beasts (later in Scripture known probably as dragons and after 1841 as dinosaurs) with man during that week. The old earth view of creation is simply not scientific and therefore unnecessary. The sad truth is that man was given a conscience (con=with, science=knowledge) with enough evidence to show there is a God and He and can be taken at His word…but they suppress the truth, yet they will be without excuse..Romans 1.18-24..>

          • Marsha Smith

            It is true that the heavens, earth, and the origins of life will never contradict the word of God but rather compliments it and further prove the validity and correctness of scripture because an infallible God is the author and creator of both. What does contradict and war with each other is OUR exegesis of said scripture and true scientific study of the heavens, earth, and the origins of life because it is fallible man who is tyring to decipher and decode the work, glory and majesty of an omnicent, omnipotent ond omnipresent God. Science in it’s truest form is (as stated in Websters Dictionary) 1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
            2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

            It is the STUDY of and the ONGOING search for knowledge. We haven’t arrived yet at having all the answers. Therefore, true science doesn’t mean it is perfect in it’s conclusions rather it is the thourough consideration and investigation of every theory and argument.

            The trueness of science isn’t determined by it’s conclusions correctly lining up with our interpretation and exegesis of scripture. If this were true then there are as many differing standard rules for measurements for “true science” as there is for every, people group, age group, and church denomination.

          • John Peters

            True science is determined by how close to the truth it is. Because we cannot prove the truth about the creation of the world, it is not related to science. Remember that, everyone! Adament young-earth creationists and old-earth theistic evolutionists, however adament you be, remember that you cannot prove the truth of your stand-point. Therefore, it is not science. Because you cannot prove the truth, no matter how good a theory you come up with because you cannot go back and see what happened. So, whatever position you take, it is a position of faith, either in the inspired Word of God, or in modern science.

          • Marsha Smith

            “There is and always will be conflict between them, mainly because God wants us to Him completely at His word and have faith in Him ” Really? Did God program deception in His created cosmos just so we would have to just trust Him? This completely goes against His character. Is it possible there is a conflict simply because we are still missing some key pieces of the puzzel still needing to be found and slipped into place before we can see and understand the complete picture? God is never the problem, He is complete and 100% accurate and full of truth. We just need to keep searching, learning and growing in our knowledge of God and His amazing creative plan. The faith part comes in when we realize that in our search for answers God allows us and even encourages us to consider every possibility without fear of offending Him by our questions and consideration and exploration of all those clues that might appear to conflict with His inspiried word. Faith is in knowing God’s word is innerant, His creation whether old or new testifies to the 100% accuracy of His word and as we continue to search it out it will one day all come together and make perfect sense. Since we are the once whose knowledge, and understanding of the mysteries of God are incomplete.

          • AC502

            Sorry about the typo. I was on my phone and the word trust was left out. “There is and always will be conflict between them (science and the Bible), mainly because God wants us to *trust *Him completely at His word and have faith in Him.” The Bible is not a science book but it does give us enough of His supernatural creation of the universe in six days and a rest. There is no deception in the cosmos. Those weren’t my words at all. The deception involves those that insert millions, billions and trillions probably before long into the age of the earth. Just reading the account in Genesis 1 should solve this ongoing apparent deception your referring to. Amen, we do need to keep searching (the Scriptures like the Bereans in Acts 17.11 to see whether things are so) and growing (in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen…2Pet.3.18). I just don’t see where Pat Robertson is coming from with his dinosaur comments. But I count it good, otherwise we would have never met.

          • Guest

            In my denomination we seem to be divided on this very subject. Many of our leaders high up in our organization as well as our college professors are in support of an old earth theory but most of our pastors over the age 40 are hard line young earthers. Our Pastors under 40 mostly lean towards an old earth this due in part by the new findings and thus new curriculum in our public schools. This is a very thin line to walk when you are schooled in a Christian college within your own denomination with the bias leaning one way and then coming away from there newly credentialed then serving as an associate under a senior pastor who believes, with much conviction I might add, the teaching of a young earth. Through careful observation of this perplexing problem of these changing times, the response of the head leadership council has been to encourage and instruct all our Pastors to preach the word with the best exegesis possible without trying to bring their own interpretation into the pulpit and let the scriptures defend themselves as the Holy Spirit reveals it in the heart of each believer. Please note, this is all just my take on what I’m observing, I could be wrong, but it appears they are trying to ever so slowly and subtly bring our younger gen. in this new direction of keeping an open mind and not ruling out but allow room for consideration of both old and new earth theories. Eventually the older gen. new earthers will drop out of the pulpits and retire and the transition will be a slow, smooth process over the course of the next 25 years. The challenge is to keep the conflict of these two opposing schools of thought to a minimum. We have a very high percentage rate of pastors over 40… I can’t remember exactly how high but it seems like it is in the upper 70%. A major rift could be devastating. I don’t believe our denomination is alone in this transition. Again, this is just a personal observation.
            Here I go with a long post again… sorry.

          • jcncuz

            Sorry about the typo. I was on my phone and the word trust was left out. “There is and always will be conflict between them (science and the Bible), mainly because God wants us to trust Him completely at His word and have faith in Him.” The Bible is not a science book but it does give us enough of His supernatural creation of the universe in six days and a rest. There is no deception in the cosmos. Those weren’t my words at all. The deception involves those that insert millions, billions and trillions probably before long into the age of the earth. Just reading the account in Genesis 1 should solve this ongoing apparent deception your referring to. Amen, we do need to keep searching (the Scriptures like the Bereans in Acts 17.11 to see whether things are so) and growing (in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen…2Pet.3.18). I just don’t see where Pat Robertson is coming from with his dinosaur comments. But I count it good, otherwise we would have never met.

    • Making sense

      lol. what if quantum theory is possible with God, if you truly you believed that God is all powerful, time and space doesn’t matter all.

      • PSC502

        I watched the secular “Fabric of the Cosmos” series on PBS and I thought the quantum realm they described sounded a lot like the spirit realm. I have not put much faith in it but I have considered that time travel could explain God existing to create the universe. But because He created the universe and it’s laws those laws should have no power over Him. Kind of like the laws of the know universe seem to have no power in the quantum level. Just thoughts.

        • Proud2BCanadian

          Sorry. Man will never travel in time to the past. Know how I know? Because otherwise we would have people from the future showing up in today’s world left right and center. No, we know for sure that man will not travel into the past. We can’t prove whether or not they’ll travel into the future, but certainly not the past.

          • Marsha Smith

            .

          • Proud2BCanadian

            Ok. I think I’ve understood what you’re saying now. But what does it have to do with the Creation Story? That’s what I haven’t got yet. Are you saying that because time is irrelevant with God, and since he was the only one alive from days 1-5 that they weren’t specific amounts of time so much as they were distinctive periods of time?

          • Marsha Smith

            What I’m saying is this, God is eternal. He was not created. He just is- Rev 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Time, itself, was created by God. There is therefore, a space when there was God existing without created time. God is eternal meaning no begining and no end yet He Himself declares of Himself, “I Am the begining and the end”. Taken literally one can take from this that God Begins and ends somewhere. We know, however that that is not what He’s saying. There is a space beyond the measuement of time where God always exsisted and where God will continue to exist even after there is no measured time.” Of this we all agree. So, the begining and ending of God is unmeasurable becase it was, is and always will be encased and enfolded in His manifold nature and presence throughout eternity. In Gen. 1:1 “In the begining God created the heavens and the earth…” Is this begining within the confines of God’s created time or is it found somewhere in between God’s “begining” (His eternal self) and the moment He created and set time in motion? Did He create time first or the heavens and the earth? How do we know? The more we learn about the heavens, the more we learn that it keeps going and going and going with no end in sight. It is so beyond us that our most brilliant scientists can’t wrap their minds around it. The very heavens themselves could stretch throughout eternity and we are trying to date it. When God spoke His word to the writer if Genisis, He was describing Himself to a created being with a brain made from a physical matter that is not eternal and has no concept of what eternal means because all he ever understood had a begining and an end. Without overloading the humane brain with information that is impossible for us to digest in the first place, He speaks truly of Himself and of His creation in a way that can be grasped not entirely but conceptualy. It is all truth but not complete in disclosure. That great mystery will be revealed when we ourselves become eternal with God. It’s interesting how we fight and bite each other in order to defend our ideas of what it all means and what it looks like when in reality, the majesty and glory and all else that is God is unknowable. We somehow believe that if we can’t explain Him and what it all means then He ceases to be ALL that He is. When you see one denomination trashing another’s beliefs, this leader tearing down that leader and vice versa, it’s as if they are saying, “I have such a grasp and an understanding about God that I am above scripture that tells me to love my brother and not judge him and I’m justified in calling him a heretic, judged and cursed by God.” Both leaders represented in this article are guilty of this as are countless others. Consider this for a moment, combine the greatest Biblical writer, the most studied theologian, the greatest scientist, the nearest and dearest Christan seeker of God and put that information in one brain and all that wisdom and knowledge is still a pin drop of water in a thousand seas compared to the wisdom of God.

        • Marsha Smith

          I’ve wondered that myself, God created time. He therefore is soverign over time and not subject to it. He might have chosen to submit Himself to it… or not. And then the thought hit me, What about that space before time was created? That space, having no limit of time, would encompass everything including the space in which the clock began. For trinitarians like myself- Is this how Jesus can be baptised on earth by John the Baptist, be pleased and speak of it from heaven as God the Father and as the Holy Spirit Land upon Him in the form of a dove? PLEASE DON’T THROW STONES AT ME. It’s late… again and I’m tired, I’m just typing the thoughts that are tumbling around up in my tired A.D.D head so I can be free of them and finally sleep. Seriously, who else could I possibly share this kind of stuff with? Heh :-P

          • PSC502

            I think it could explain the Trinity, very clearly God is in three places at the same time here. God is able to exist wherever while yet remaining everywhere, Jesus said He always did what He saw the Father doing, this should prove His Godhood. In Jesus’s body existed All the fullness of the Godhead. Not just the Son, because the Trinity while being 3 is not divided, or is in fact 1 as well, only in God’s realm do I believe this could be. Our universe is limited, by the parameters set forth by it creator, and limited by it’s power, But God call’s those things that are not as though they be, He Is ALMIGHTY GOD. THE I AM because I AM. To whom be all glory and power, and dominion forever, amen, praise the LORD.

          • Marsha Smith

            Yes, I went through something that was very traumatic as a child. So much so it had affected my adult life. One day while in prayer I was seeking God for complete healing over my mind, and emotions that were damaged by this single event. As a child I never breathed a word to anyone. No help was sought and no one knew to carry this before God on my behalf. I carried this burden alone. The, some 35 years later while praying over the scars that remaind God spoke to me so clearly it stunned me. He said, “Begin to pray over that situation right now for that child. Though you don’t understand what I’m doing, do it anyway and I will do the rest.” I did and I recieved an instantanious healing that I can’t even begin to put into words. All symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder vanished and never returned again. From that point on I began to get a small glimps of God’s soverignity.

          • Proud2BCanadian

            I just want to say that I disagree, but I respect your beliefs. I believe that the real reason that you received healing was because you began to get your focus off the hurt you were experiencing at the time, and set your focus on someone else (actually someone of the past, yourself) and started praying for them, rather than yourself. I believe it was your focus. But if I’m wrong, I’m willing to apologize in Heaven. But I won’t mind, because I’m sure you’ll have some apologizing to me to do… Just kidding, in case you’re wondering.

          • John Peters

            Sorry Proud2BCanadian. I’m Canadian too, but I agree with Rev Mar on this issue – at least to some extent. The Bible says, “While you are yet speaking, I will answer.” No, God does not change the past on us, but He is not limited by time – He can change what is happening now because he know what will happen in the future.

          • Marsha Smith

            Exactly!

          • John Peters

            Lol. Yes, I think I understand what you’re saying… But what I don’t understand about your belief is this… If you prayed for yourself as a child, how come the healing only came as an adult?
            Thanks for your patience with me… I think I still don’t quite understand.

          • thejoker

            yeah, it takes lots of patience to put up with you.

          • John Peters

            Lol. How did you know?

          • thejoker

            i’m not a mule-head like JP&RM.

          • John Peters

            Does JP mean John Peters?

          • thejoker

            who else?

          • olivia

            What about PSC502?

          • thejoker

            he doesn’t fit on the scales

          • John Peters

            O.K., O.K. Please let’s be kind one to another… Humour is a great thing, but I repeat, please use it to build us up, not tear people down. I don’t personally mind, but please don’t pick on anybody who might.

          • Marsha Smith

            It’s OK John Peter, I’ve been around for 48 year and been called a lot worse. Can’t survive in this buisness with thin skin.

          • John Peters

            O.K… It’s just that I always took all the ribbing in our family, because I never minded it at all… But I remember teasing a fellow once, and he didn’t take it very well… I don’t think he ever entirely forgave, me, in spite of my entreaties… So I’ve always kind of felt sensitive about ribbing that could hurt people…

          • Marsha Smith

            You are kind, my friend, and display the heart of Christ.

          • John Peters

            Thanks… I’m not sure I deserve all that, but God has been good to me… I would be really glad to keep in touch with you – I’ve been really impressed with you – not so much with your theological beliefs as with your love for the brethren! I don’t want to publish my personal e-mail account all over the internet, but if you’re interested in keeping touch, just send me an e-mail at faqseminary@gmail.com. I don’t know about you, but I enjoy getting to know those who truly display the love of Christ better! So anyhow… if you’re interested… Otherwise, just forget it.

          • Marsha Smith

            Don’t over think it. The healing came when I realized God was equally present with me then as He is now.

          • John Peters

            Ok… I’ve been re-reading your comments several times trying grasp a clear understanding of the idea… I think I’ve got it now. By the way, I appreciate your attitude… it’s not one of imposing your views on others (one of my common mistakes) but one of trying to clearly present what you believe is true. Thanks for your truly Christian attitude (that of love – “love is the bond of perfection”) – it’s rare. We may disagree, but as long as we agree on love through the blood of the Lamb… nothing else is as important as that. Amen?

          • Marsha Smith

            Amen John Peters. THAT—> “love is the bond of perfection” is the greatest wisdom of all. God is love, Christ displayed that love here on earth not only in His life but in His submission to the cross and the Holy Spirit indwelling in us, has empowered us to love in the manner Christ displayed for us through God’s Holy word :-). PERFECTION! You, my brother, are truly wise.

          • John Peters

            The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom… I don’t think I’ve actually attained as much as you think I have… But it IS encouraging that someone thinks I have to some degree… But what is it the song says? “Toiling on, toiling on…” Let’s just keep serving the Lord and trust Him for the fruit!

          • thejoker

            actually, 2 in the morning is early, not late

  • Michael Valdez

    In the beginning GOD created the heaven and the earth. GOD is the beginning, nay, the cause of all things.
    Ages untold may have elapsed between the calling of matter into being and the reduction of chaos to orders arrangement. Remember, One day, not an ordinary day but a Day of GOD, an age. With GOD a thousand years, nay a thousand thousand ages, are but as a day that is past. Please read the word in Hebrew, dinasours and such does not disprove creation. The earth is millions of years old. Remember GOD is the cause, creator of all things. Have faith, not try to figure out in your own mind. Just believe and have faith in GOD. If you choose to call me feel free.

    • Proud2BCanadian

      Why on earth do you want the earth to be millions of years old? (no pun intended) Why take God’s Word as false or as in need of extra-Biblical interpretation if the simple explanation makes more sense? Why would you want to put millions of years before Creation?

  • Adelthemystyic

    What Robertson has basically said here is that Scripture is neither infallible nor inspired.

    Just one more reason why I quit regarding anything he said as worthy of merit years ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dvinall Dave Vinall

    I can’t help feeling these discussions totally miss the point! The reality is no one takes the Bible literally (not even you!!!) We all draw different lines between fact and allegory – there was some guy who gouged out his eye a couple of years ago because ‘Jesus said to’. Was Jesus being literal or making a point in Matthew 5? I imagine we’d all agree he was making a point. So we draw the line in a different place to that poor one-eyed guy.

    Something doesn’t have to be literal to be true. Things can be true but not literal. Rivers can clap their hands and hill be joyful… we can soar on wings like eagles. These are all true but not literal.

    Can’t we just agree to disagree on where the line between allegory and fact is in the opening account on Genesis. Who knows, maybe it was written as a scientific textbook? Maybe it was written as a beautiful piece of poetry? Either way, the truth doesn’t change.

    You do know we all look a bit stupid to everyone else when we argue over it?

    • John Peters

      If Genesis’ being poetry denies it’s relevance and truth, then throw Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon out of your Bible. While your at it, cut the songs of Miriam, Moses, David, etc. out of your Bible. With what you have left, try to construct a valid reason for Christ to come to earth. If you can’t trust Genesis, forget original sin, forget monogamous marriage, forget clothes, etc. I don’t want to tear down what you’ve said – some of it is very good and true. But whether or not Genesis is a scientific textbook or not makes no difference – it’s part of God’s Word, which makes it inspired, infallible, and sufficient.

    • Robert Cameron

      The Bible is not 100% literal and it is not 100% figurative. And, I think you’re confusing allegory with hyperbole. Jesus was using hyperbole (exaggeration) when he said if your right eye offends you to pluck it out. If he meant it literally, he would be guilty of condoning self-mutilation, which was condemned by the Mosaic Law which he kept perfectly. Our responsibility is not to assume it’s all literal and live it word for word, and not to assume it’s all figurative and rely on what we “feel” is right. Instead, we are to use our God-given ability to reason to study scripture verse by verse and determine for ourselves which is literal and which is meant to be figurative.

  • paulthe

    What Pat Robertson is saying is the calculations of Bishop Ussher are not divinely inspired.

    • Robert Cameron

      That may or may not be what Robertson intended to say, but it most certainly is not what he actually said.

  • Adriel Mangual

    The biggest advocate of evolution is time. By justifying that Adam was around for billions of years then opens the door to say that Adam evolved, which then opens the door to us not being created in God’s image but evolved into his image, which then opens the door to gay marriage because God did not create woman for man, rather they just evolved at another time in a different form. That also opens the door for God not being all powerful cause he couldn’t create man perfect but just the building blocks and then opens the door for us still evolving which then opens the door for us not needing God because we’ve made it billions of years without God, so why do we need all these rules on our lives when in reality he’s just a spectator in all this… If he even exists. You see what happens when we go outside the word?

    • Proud2BCanadian

      Amen, brother! Stick to the word of God! The word of God is inspired, it is sharper than a two-edged sword!

    • Making sense

      Just in case you are not aware, if you are not a Jew the Adam and eve story is not your culture, the bible history and stories are based on the life and culture of Israelites and Jewish people who live in the Middle East to the east of the Mediterranean Sea, The land mass is connected to Asia. if you look deeper into it, it is not the story of black or White or yellow and red, but focus only on the experience of those who believed that they are the chosen one, The Israelites”. The Adam and eve story can not be the basis of fact but the basis of faith of understanding a question where mankind begin their existence. this question is like the question of the Chicken and the egg. There is always a question to every answer, if life is from molecules there is always a question of where those things came from? who created them? if you answer me it is from atoms, then I’ll repeat the same question.

      Using the story of Adam and eve as basis of your perspective of creation is like you are stating that we created God. It is clear that Adam and Eve story is based on the life and values of a Patriarchal society, whose God is HE not a She, remember also Jesus represents a manly Image that harden their belief, that God is a male, however you have to understand that this culture is not only common in Israel Culture but it globally accepted by society whose culture is base on the Physical needs of every living things. if I have a sex organ of a woman, my need would be a man, same goes with other living things, however, this is not always true in every creatures there living creatures. but for us human this is not common, our mind always play a big Role in our evolution, our decision, and to our way of life. but to live in peace with other human being the only answer we can have is “if we can not live in a society create new society”

      • Jim

        A true Jeww is one who has cicumsision of the heart.There is a book called Spiritual Isrial you might find a good read.Also you might be surprised if you knew where all the decendants of the twelve tribes of Jacob(Isrial) migrated to.God bless.

  • Texas Pete

    I am personally tired of Ken Ham bullying everyone that disagrees with him. “Enemies?” Seriously? Everyone who doesn’t cow down to Ken Ham and his Genesis policy is against God, doesn’t love Jesus, is not filled with the Holy Spirit and is on a quick slide to hell. Wise up Christians! Ken Ham is in the Genesis “selling” business. Visit his theme park, buy his literature, watch his movies and videos …. sell, sell, sell! Line Ken Ham’s pockets and his big business of selling Genesis. Anyone who does not love his brother that he can see, doesn’t the Father who he can’t see. Ken Ham needs a heart check along with all of the bullies who religiously follow him.

    • John Peters

      I’m sorry, this is a contradiction of all that Ken Ham represents. Also, if you’re honest, you’ll admit that you were tearing him down yourself – and I, knowing him somewhat better than you, can say that he is not at all what you are representing him to be. I don’t want to attack you personally, but your comment needs to be refuted.

      • Making sense

        I agree he needs to be refuted, I can say the same he needs to know that Jesus works with humble heart and Jesus clearly stated that “thou shall not Judge for you will also be Judge” my advise for Texas Pete to read again your bible and please recheck your heart. thanks.

    • Hersh or is it Harsh

      I agree with John Peters. Also, there is a lot of “so-called” christians doing what you say, so I hope if you decide to blast Ken, you are putting equal time in on the others… Joel, Benny and list goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on…. you get my point I hope.

    • Tod Thompson

      Pat Robertson has said so many hateful, hurtful and outright stupid things that I would be tempted to use a stronger word than enemy. And Pat Robertson could teach us all lessons on hucksterism and lining our pockets.

      • sylviamzz

        Thank you, Tod. Not one of us is perfect, neither Pat Robertson nor Ken Ham.

    • sylviamzz

      And Pat Robertson doesn’t sell books? What we all need to do is stop the infighting. Ken Ham needs to calm down, Pat Roberson needs to calm down, we all need to calm down. We’re all allowed to have opinions, but we’re all mandated to love one another.

  • Blessing, Kaduna – Nigeria

    Am really not too sure i understand why the subject of the earth being millions or billions of years old is important or why it should recieve such reviews and comments and harsh words been thrown back and forth at individuals. For me,I think we should focus more on preaching the salvation message to the lost world which includes our friends and family members etc who are not born again yet and also reaching out to the less privildged among us and teaching people to build their hope and faith strong in God and His word. I personally do not think getting creation date right or wrong would take anyone to hell or mis-led anyone. it is enough for me to know that God created the earth in six days and rested on the 7th.

    • Proud2BCanadian

      You’re certainly right on this : “getting the creation date right or wrong [will not] take anyone to hell.” True! And the gospel is certainly more important than millions of years in the Bible. And yet, we need to be ready to defend the Bible down to the very words spoken. (And, I might add, the words that were not written) But thank-you for pointing out that the focus ought to be on Jesus Christ.

      • Pastor Phil

        The Bible needs us to defend it? Inspired, truth, God-spoken, and it needs us to defend it? We need it to infuse us with what is important and stop arguing about non-essentials. The first five words of Genesis 1:1 are critical “in the beginning God created.” The rest will be revealed in time. i agree with Kaduna – preach the revealed messaged of Christ and leave what is seen through the mirror darkly alone until God gives us eyes to see clearly.

        • Proud2BCanadian

          Excuse me, I didn’t say that the Bible needs us to defend us. Rather, I said that we ought to be ready to defend it. “Be ready always to give an answer…” Our hope is because of the infallible Word of God. But if non-Christians look at us, and say, “What about millions of years?”, what are we going to say? “Oh, well… The Bible’s not right there…”??? I don’t think so – that would be an insult to the gospel and something that would take away from our witness. And I will draw your attention to the fact that I also said that the gospel is the most important thing. Please re-read comments more carefully before trying to tear them down. Thank-you!

          • Marsha Smith

            No, we don’t say “the Bible isn’t right there” to believe in an old earth isn’t accusing the Bible of error but rather questioning our interpretation and exegesis.

          • thejoker

            you might think better if you got to bed on time

          • Proud2BCanadian

            Please let’s try to be gentlemanly about this… Use your humour to up-build, not to tear down.

          • Marsha Smith

            LOL, yes, yes I would. That is a very correct assesment. :-)

          • Proud2BCanadian

            As to Rev Mar’s comment, I would like to draw on something another commentator on this site pointed out. This is a relatively new idea – less than 200 years old. Do we want to interpret the Scriptures in light of some new idea, or in light of 4000 years of Bible patriarchs, etc.? Take the side of a new theory if you like to, but I’d rather safe it and stay on the side of 4000 years of Bible patriarchs such as Peter, Paul, and the such like. If millions of years were actually in the world’s history, we would expect to at least see the idea in some other old literature. However, we have absolutely no Biblical or extra-Biblical evidence. I repeat, I’ll stay on the more realistic side.

        • Marsha Smith

          Pastor Phill, I agree with your comment except for this statement, “leave what is seen through the mirror darkly alone until God gives us eyes to see clearly”. God created us to be curious, thinking, learning and growing individuals with an inate desire and drive to learn more and more about Him. To just “leave what is seen through the mirror darkly alone until God gives us eyes to see clearly” is like a Pastor telling his congregation to enter the church but leave their brains at the door. In my personal relationship with God, He encourages me to seek, to ask, to ponder, and to explore the possibilities as I study His word and and the world around me. I would want nothing less from my children do you? Why would God? Do you feel our questions might somehow catch Him off guard or cause Him to become shaken and disturbed? I believe He delights in our inquisitiveness and finds great joy when the light bulb suddely come on in those questions that previously had us stumped. And when we follow a rabit trail I’m confident He is able to stir us back on course with the encouragement to keep searching but try looking over here or there. He Gave us a brain lets use it.

          • Proud2BCanadian

            Yes God gave us a brain, but He did it with His inspiring Word. God did not give us a brain to warp the Scriptures.
            Just a personal note – if you kept your comments a little shorter, people would be more likely to read them.

          • Marsha Smith

            What? A preacher keep it short? Most of you have probably been doing this long enough to master that skill, I’m still working on it. Thanks for the reminder I’ll keep it in check. ;-)

          • John Peters

            Lol. Yes, I know how hard it is to keep things short… Especially as I usually only have 20 minutes for each of my messages… (In case you mis-read what I said: Minutes, not hours)

            A personal comment – does anyone know how to add a profile image to my disqus account?

          • John Peters

            P.S.: I hope it didn’t sound like I was complaining about only 20 minutes… I ought to be grateful – not many 16 year-olds get the chance to preach 2-3 times per month, anyhow…

  • TiredofFales Religion

    Robertson did not say anything about the Bible except to say that it does not teach a 6000 year old earth, and it does not. People, watch how you go after someone. I guess we’ll have to run Robertson off like we did Rob Bell, just for having an opinion, one which the Bible does not explicitly reject, I might add.

    • John Peters

      My apologies for contradicting you, but the Bible most certainly does reject that idea. The Bible gives a clear genealogy of the people up till the time of Jesus Christ, so it certainly is not silent on this topic. It almost seems as though God specifically wanted to give us no room for doubt on how old the earth was, for he gave us detailed genealogies, including how old people were, and when their first child was born! My friend, do not fall to those who would like to deceive you into believing that the Bible is silent on this issue. Like it or not, the Bible is not silent – and you have three choices – Accept it, Reject it, or Ignore it. You, at least, will recognize the dangers of rejecting the truth of the Bible, and the Bible also says we will not escape if we neglect the truth. Be careful of those who would deceive you!

    • Robert Cameron

      I’m honestly not sure losing Robertson would be such a bad thing, he has done a lot over the years to lead people astray.

      The Bible does not support the idea of an “old earth”, meaning millions of years old as speculated by evolution theory. It does support the idea of a “young earth”, closer to 6000 years old. If you assume it is millions of years old, you have to question whether God created it in 6 days or whether it played out as evolutionists say. If you throw out 6 days of creation, you’re blatantly rejecting the Bible’s ability to be perfect and accurate, and by extension, rejecting God. It is a very slippery slope to go down.

    • sylviamzz

      My sentiments exactly, Tired. The Bible doesn’t give us an exact number, and just like the rate of radiation, upon which carbon dating is based, we don’t know if the artificial imposition of “hours” was the same at creation as it is today. The number of hours and minutes in a day is not an exact constant, either. I believe we have lost or gained some fraction of a second or something since the massive earthquake and tsunami that hit the Pacific Rim?? And what about the sun standing still for Joshua? That wasn’t a 24-hour day. It doesn’t matter — God made everything, and our imposition of man-made time in seconds, minutes and hours is not God’s doing. We’re insisting on measuring God’s work by our measuring devices…and we’re fighting over it. Not the best use of our time.

      • John Peters

        Good point about the sun standing still for Joshua… It’s interesting that the Bible would specifically mention it when a day was not a 24-hour day as something unusual. It points out that the days in Genesis, unlike what some people would say, are literal, 24-hour days. Otherwise, it would have mentioned that something was different.

      • John

        Man created time? REALLY? “There was evening and morning, the first DAY. There was evening and morning the second day” and it goes on. Man came along on day 6. GOD created time. He imposed a 24 hour day by how He made the earth rotate. He imposed a year based on how the earth goes around the sun. A few seconds deviation does not change this!

  • Vance

    I believe Ken Ham may be unintentionally putting stumbling blocks in the way of Christians and their children, though I am sure he doesn’t mean to. Having all the events of Genesis
    2 including the creation of Adam, the naming of all the animals, Adam’s realization that he needed a helpmate like Eve, the deep sleep Adam was placed in, and the creation of Eve take place in 12 hours seems to distort the meaning of this story. For this and other reasons some believe the word “yom” should not be interpreted as a 24 hour day. The word “yom” appears in Genesis 2:4 also where it is clearly not talking about a 24 hour period. There are a lot of other Biblical reasons for questioning the 24 hour day interpretation in Genesis 1 including the “rest” of Hebrews 4:1 which many believe is referring to the 7th day. The point is that to hold a different interpretation of the events of Genesis 1 doesn’t mean you don’t believe the Bible.

    • Proud2BCanadian

      Please notice several things about Genesis 2:4. The word “day” is not accompanied by a number. Neither is it accompanied with a reference to evening & morning. Please find me a reference in Scripture where the word “day” is used with either of these accompaniments and obviously means a non-literal day. Now go to Genesis 1. You will now see that we are obviously talking about literal days.

      • Making sense

        How did you know it is not a number? for the fact that day can represent a number which is one (1). Have you read and interpreted the Greek bible? which until now the interpreters of the Hebrew and Greek scroll are still deciphering the true meaning of each word, thought they have printed it in different languages, still every interpreters make their own version of the bible. the reason is that the interpreters themselves are not convince that there is only one interpretation.

        • Proud2BCanadian

          Sorry, I guess I don’t understand what you’re saying. Are you saying that the word day in Genesis 2:4 is accompanied with a number? Or are you saying that it is irrelevant? If the fact that a number used with a day is irrelevant, then was Jonah in the fish for 3000 years?

          Also, I need to apologize for not having been clear myself… My point was that Vance was taking the verse in Peter totally out of context. We’re talking about the coming of the Lord, not the age of the earth. And, since Adam was created on Day 6, was he around for another 1000 years over Day 7? In which case, he is calling the Bible into question because the Bible is clear that Adam was not in the Garden of Eden for over 130 years.

  • kc

    Very sorry. The Martians who came to earth and found Adam the day he was created (you did not know about this?) examined his organ structure and teeth and concluded that he was 20+ years old. Eve must be deluded into saying she and he were not even around 2 days before. Why do we have this problem? Because Martians like Earthlings believe that everything must be created zero years old. They thought Adam must be first an infant. Earthlings think Earth must be perfectly spherical, no hills, no seas so that (as if so that) geological structures could slowly come about. That means they do not believe God created the Grand Canyon. Unfortunately for them and for most in this discussion God created an adult man though young, a geologically 4 billion year earth (if scientists are right) though just created, and of course a 14 billion year old universe, not by having everything start at zero like Stephen Hawkins’ singularity but by flinging stars in their places, a feat of simultaneity not possible by anyone but God. You mean that Christian Leaders such as the Robertson et al cannot see that this is what the Bible says? Or do they think Adam was an infant and a dead duck without a mother to nurse him. Mind you, Eve could not nurse him. Also infant. My suggestion. Just read the Bible and believe it. It is the inspired word of God. And God was not afraid of creating paleontologists who know how to date rocks and fossils.

  • Pastor Jeff

    If Genesis can be proven “wrong” or declared only to be figurative language what we do with God’s promise to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob… when does myth end and truth begin. Robertson is mistaken… I wonder if he has ever read this from ICR or AiG?

  • Pastor Jeff

    Time and chance are not mechanisms. They are simply measurements of movement in a space (time) and randomness (chance.) Evolution has no “mechanism.”

  • Brian

    arguing this point feels like witnessing to a jehova’s witness. each side is deeply entrenched and passionate for their cause….
    I believe in a young earth but if I’m wrong… I could really care less.
    Love you all!

  • Zanele

    I’m surprised that the so-called “big names” in Christian leadership are even debating this issue!! Have they read the book of Job? What are those animals that re described in chapter 40 and chapter 41? Also, has anyone read Isaiah 40 and 41.

  • Terry Bomar

    I believe in the “gap” theory, and I believe it explains it all very easily. Gen 1:1 says “in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Verse two begins with “and”. Which means “and now”. There is a gap between verse one and verse two that could be billions of years. Verse two on… refers to the establishment of earth that now is and applies to us today. God would not, and did not, need to explain all of eternity past to us (we wouldn’t understand it anyway). He simply stated a fact: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth! And now (verse two on…) let me begin with what you can grasp. (It also explains why He said to man to go and “replenish the earth”.

    • John Peters

      Could I ask you or someone else who believes in the Gap Theory a question? It’s just this : What supposedly happened during the Gap?

  • Shane C

    Although I am more inclined to the young earth position, I am seriously very very discouraged with the attitude of Ken Ham and his dogmatic group of proponents (especially from AiG) who keep calling those who disagree with them as “compromisers” and thus creating a huge dissension among the body of Christ. Seriously I don’t think this “debate” between young and old creationism will go away until we meet Jesus in heaven. As a Christian, I must look at both sides of the polemics… Meanwhile I think satan is smiling away because he can keep Christians arguing on this issue while forgetting the lost out there.

  • $23313105

    I believe the Bible as God’s word. The Bible does not give us a date for creation. It also speaks of the 6 days. I take that literally. but if I am wrong, or Ham is wrong, the Lord is always right. If in fact science proves something is true, that is not making God a liar, We are the ones capable of error. I do not consider the 6000 years one of the fundamentals of our faith.

  • Tod Thompson

    I agree that the Bible does not definitively give us an answer on how old the earth is. However, I strenuously disagree that we must bow down to the new age religion of science. I wonder what these science professors would say about a man turning water to wine or walking on the sea?

    • Marsha Smith

      Tod, the debate isn’t about the validity of miracles. Many Christian Scientists acknowledge the Biblical teaching and operation of miracles and of their application even today. What is in question is the validity of scientific discovery of an earth that formed and produced life over a billion years versus 6,000 years begining with the 6 day creation week ending with a 7th day for rest by the creator. What is agreed upon, by christian scientists however, is that the earth WAS without a question of doubt, created by an inteligent, purposeful being with a specific design and purpose in mind and the folcal point being that of His prize creation… man. Whether God placed all the building blocks in place and set them in motion to accomplish His task over billions of years or to be completed in only six days is a miracle regardless of how one believes.

      • John Peters

        I think Tod knows the debates not about miracles. His point is that if scientists have priority over the Word of God, then we have to throw out the miracles of the New Testament because they are not “scientifically possible.”

  • T.M.Cullum

    This is an interesting topic and one that need be fought. Science is blind in many ways and the blind leading the blind is what I think of when I think of Pat Robertson’s comment. I, too, once believed that the universe had the appearence of age when the speed of light was thought to be a constant and scientists were certain of their facts. But would you not know it: they are admittedly wrong on many things: Light is slowing down and the rate at which it is slowing is affected by many factors, too many to be really certain of anything that was not observed 5000 years ago. Rings on trees were once thought to reveal years, and now reveal cycles that include drought, floods, and possibly radiation exposure by astroids exloding on earth and nearby systems. Even gravity is called into question as we now know that major shifts in gravity exist and this effects light, weather, rings on trees, and tides. God is in control and to believe the common summons of science and the world is to believe that “it’s all good” and that man can and will control their own destiny. Hey, anyone want to buy my carbon credits?

  • Pastor D

    Genesis 1:1 is not the first day of creation so know one knows the time frame between 1:1 and 1:2. The most important thing is not the age of the earth but God did in fact create it.

  • DaveEkstrom

    Nonsense! The ones who put stumbling blocks in the way of our children are those who assert that the Bible says things that are obviously not true. How could we see stars millions of light years away if the creation occurred only thousands of years ago? The Bible does not demand a young earth and given its silence on the subject, it is unreasonable to deny the evidence of creation occurring long ago, even 15 1/2 billion years ago. This is not compromise. Believing in biblical inerrancy doesn’t mean that one and only one interpretation of the text is demanded. Gen. 1 is a poem. It is not literal anymore than God literally rides on storm clouds. The text itself makes no sense taken literally. Ham practices advocacy science and lousy exegesis.

    • John Peters

      Genesis 1 is a poem??? What does it matter? If that effects its authenticity or inspired state, then please chop Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes out of your Bible. Also, out go the songs of David, Miriam, Moses, etc. And if Genesis 1 is a poem, then how about the rest of the book? You’ve just opened a door to say that whatever Scriptures we disagree with, we can write off as a poem. Sorry, but I disagree strongly.

    • Genci Cesula

      Please it does nor require much to understand from the Bible that God spoke and things came to existence. God create science and not everything that God created has to fit science. You come to the Bible with arguments like this one: How could we see stars millions of light years away if the creation occurred only thousands of years ago? and you say the Bible can’t mean that. You never come to the Word of God with silly arguments like that. That is to come to the Bible with unbelief. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. Your argument is no different then of the false science and atheist that say: God can’t exist therefore he does not. You are saying the same way the world could not had been created in six days and therefore is not created. Jesus said: O you little faith or you do not believe the power of the Almighty God. We chose to believe only what it seems to us believable as humans or what we can explain. It hard to read Genesis, or Deuteronomy or Psalms or the rest of the Bible and come up with this idea that it took God millions of years to create the world. Those who take that position do it only because they want to be accepted and supposedly save the Bible and God. I can give you hundreds of reasons from the Bible that it took God only six days.

      • John Peters

        Great points! I especially appreciate your use of Scripture… It seems odd that people who want to put millions of years in the Bible can’t even twist the Scriptures to say that – they have to impose it on the Bible from outside the Bible, while at the same time (no pun intended) redefining the word day… Actually, on second thought, it isn’t odd… It’s just another proof of literal six days.

        A side note… I appologize for getting upset in the comment below… I realise that love is “the bond of perfection.” Sorry!

  • Marsha Smith

    It’s interesting, we have great Bible colleges that we send our children to with wonderful sience departments geared at discovering more about our earth and environment that surrounds us, the wonders and beauties of space above us and more about an unimaginable God that created it all; but then we bristle, fume and chomp at the discoveries they are unmasking because it doesn’t fit into the tiny box we try to stuff God into. How arrogant of us to think we no longer need to search and learn about God and be open to all new discoveries for fear it will conflict with our present understanding of God’s inspired ancient text. We can’t stop growing in our search for wisdom and understanding of all God is and has created. Our scientists and science students feel intimidated and are bullied into keeping quiet about new mysteries discovered because we refuse to consider that even though the scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct, our interpretations and understanding of scriptures are not infallible and will always give room for further discovery of hidden truth and meaning that can only be found through our continued quest for knowledge and understaqnding of the Bible AND our world around us. Even the scriptures say in Psalms 19 “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament reveals His handywork.” God created us to be seekers of truth and full of curiosity and a need for greater understanding of Who He is and All He created. If we sit back and settle for the knowledge gained in the generations before us we will cease to increase our understanding of God. Why are we refusing to grow in our knowledge around us and with the tools available to us today? Is it possible that we set aside our interpretation of what we think God is saying in Genisis from the limited amount of knowledge available to the generations of the past and consider some key pieces of the puzzel that is now being discovered and available today? Are we so afraid to consider the fact that we might have misinterpreted or misunderstood a portion of scripture due to the fact that up until recently, we had a much limited understanding of what lay hidden in our vast cosmos? Here’s a reality check, the more we refuse to accept what is being discovered by our scientists and many of our own Christian college science majors, the dumber we not only look to the world but the dumber we are becoming. God will not strike you dead and send you to hell for even considering the fact that WE, not God, might have been a bit presumpuous and yes even mistaken about our belief and teaching that the earth is only 6000 years old. He gave us a mind and a couriosity and he expects us to use it and explore and ask hard questions. This doesn’t disturb Him or cause Him to quake in fear that we might come to a wrong conclusion. He is our Father and He expects us to constantly expand and grow and even make mistakes. He is, however disturbed when we refruse to keep growing out of fear of what we might find and then bully others who are not afraid and who are secure in their relationship with Him to trust that He will allow and even delights in such questions, discoveries and quest for answers. No wonder our young people are bailing out of our churches once they reach college age. Any time our interpretation of scripture begins to be challenged by further discoveries in the science communities we stick our fingers in our ears and accuse even our own brothers and sisters in Christ of Bible heresy. Our kids are looking at the undiniable scientific discoveries and comparing them with our interpretation of scripture based on our grandparents understanding of the world around them with the limited discoveries available to them in their day, (and yes, we have refused to grow since then) and our young people are finding our explanation of scripture unbelieveable therefore, in their opinion, our whole beliefe system must be in error. Of course it’s not but it’s easier for them to come to the conclusion that there must not be a God because their christian parents are teaching them something that science has proven otherwise. Therefore all of the Bible must be a fable. Funny thing is, that’s the same conclusion you are afraid you will be forced to make if you consider an old earth theory. Why is it so hard to consider the possibility that WE might have been in error of our understanding of scripture found in Genesis. If we grow with the discoveries of our world in the science community and add to that, our faith in God and His active role in our creation then we will all see that it all fits together and reveals a greater revelation and understanding of God than we could have previously imagined. I’m not saying we except and come to the same conclusions as scientists who deny a created earth and a soverign God actively present in all things ivolving His created children, heaven forbid! I’m saying we stop being afraid of progress and stop demonizing higher education but embrace what is now proven fact in our present day discoveries and let it help us understand what scripture declares and stop forcing scripture to conform to our limited understanding. Many scientists have actually found God in all of these new discoveries. They are coming to the conclusion that a living, thinking creative force had to be at work and in the center of all that is because even the eliments that caused earth to come together over a vast period of time is so perfectly timed down to a tenth of a second all the way to the moment life appeared. Had anything in the timing of that cosmic soup been off even a second, life could not have come into existance. God IS revealing Himself and the religious community is missing it much like we did at the revealing of “God With Us” two thousand years ago in a dirty stable. Let God be God and let Him blow apart the box we have tried to build around Him. Trust Him enough to allow Him to unfold the mysteries in both the scriptures and in His created world that sorrounds us. Whether you are a new earth or old earth believer, consider all information that is out there with a teachable spirit and an open mind instead of burying your head in the sand with your backside in the air for all the secular world to see. They see very little of Christ in us if all they see is our backsides waving in the air.

    • Paul Searle

      I’d like to ask you a question, where did death come from?

      • Marsha Smith

        Paul, I asume you are asking me this question because you believe I am arguing against the Biblical account of Adam of Eve, let me assure you, I’m not discounting the creation of a literal Adam and Eve. Some old earth believers do feel that the story of Adam and Eve is metiphorical, this however, is not something I ascribe to. It is my personal belief that there was a literal first man and woman created by God in their fullest human state who did not evolve from some primitive early cell life. I also believe they were placed placed in the garden of Eden as described in the Bible. I’m open to argument but in my studies thus far, I feel confident with this position. Therefore, to answer your question, “Where did death come from?”, My answer is, It is the consequence of sin from the fall of Adam and Eve in their disobedience to God in regards to not eating from the tree of life.

        • John Peters

          Could you please read the Genesis account over a couple times until you get it straight? Adam & Eve didn’t disobey God in regard to the tree of life, but in regard to His commands to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Study the Scriptures carefully, I implore you!

          • Marsha Smith

            John,
            forgive my mistake in typing tree of life instead of the tree of good and evil. This was typed after only three hours of sleep the previous evening. I have read the account in Geneses over and over again in my studies through the years and it is now memorized forwards and backwards and I will, no-doubt, continue to read it and study it in the very near future so you need not implore me to do so but thank you anyway :-).

          • John Peters

            Yes, sorry if I sounded upset with you… It’s just there are some people who have commented on this site that obviously don’t know the account… Sorry if I sounded mean!

          • Marsha Smith

            No offence taken.

    • John Peters

      You mention discoveries near the start of your comment. Actually, modern discoveries are the very things which defend a young earth. Rather, it is the theories that evolutionists are coming out with, which, as you have read in one of my other comments, is not science at all, but rather, “oppositions of science, falsely so called.” Scientists are discovering DNA in dinosaurs that were supposedly millions of years old. However, there is no possible way that DNA could survive anything like that long. I repeat, the evidence is backing up young earth creationists radically. And really, it has to, or else when they were in the gross minority, they wouldn’t have had a chance of getting a word in edge-wise. If the evolutionists had “massive proofs” for evolution as they say they do, then young earth creationists would have been out of business years ago.

  • http://pathwaysradio.weebly.com/ Ronnie James

    Pat Robertson just can’t go off quietly into the sunset. That would be too easy. Instead, he seems to be on a mission to constantly outdo himself with more and more ridiculous and offensive statements. Remember him saying; “The Poor Jews Don’t Understand’ Antisemitism?”

    Then you have…
    “The doctrine that the earth is neither the center of the universe nor immovable, but moves even with a daily rotation, is absurd, and both philosophically and theologically false, and at the least an error of faith.” –Catholic Church’s decision against Galileo Galilei

    “A good example of an ever-changing theory is that of light. The ancient Greeks developed a “corpuscular” theory of light, i.e. that light is a flux of tiny particles emanating from a source and moving linearly in all directions. The theory of geometrical optics was developed on the basis of this assumption. This theory successfully served mankind for centuries in designing and building lenses, prisms, flat and curved mirrors, vision aids, and later microscopes, telescopes, and other optical systems. Then it was discovered that light also follows a wavy motion and so it was reinterpreted as electromagnetic waves of a very short wavelength. Scientifically, the corpuscular theory developed into a wave theory. In the beginning of the 20th Century, Albert Einstein suggested that, in fact, light possesses a dual nature, i.e. the unification, in one entity, of two opposite concepts of a particle of matter and of a wavy motion. This new idea became the basis of the new fundamental theory of quantum mechanics.
    It is most interesting to note that the Kabbalah uses light as a metaphor for the power of G–d. It speaks in terms of the Or Ein Sof – the Infinite light. One of the principles of faith is that G–d is omnipotent and may carry opposites. The fact that light possesses a dual nature and can carry an opposite makes it the perfect metaphor for Divine energy. In this third stage of the development of the light theory it becomes apparent that this unification of two concepts underlines the unity of G–d within creation.”
    3500 years of biblical academic scholarly understanding vs: Pat?
    I’ll go with the sages.

  • Paul Searle

    To those who believe that the first chapters of Genesis are allegory I for one am glad that James Young Simpson did not share your view. A physician he found carrying out surgical procedures without anaesthetic profoundly disturbing. Inspired by Genesis ch2 v21 – The Lord God put the man into a deep sleep…he went on to discover chloroform.

    So if you happen to have to go to hospital for a surgical procedure give thanks to God for the scientist who took His word literally. God bless.

    • John Peters

      Wow! I had never heard that story before… I find it quite interesting, especially as my father is a medical doctor… But the point is good too – Take God’s Word literally!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001000659454 Samuel David Early Sr.

    cast doubt, and it opens all kind of doors, that is what the serpent (the devil) was trying to to do in the 1st place, he knew full what God said and why he said it. the only he could come against the word of God, was to lie. I am convinced that is how lucifer deceived 1/3 of the angles of heaven to follow him. the whole thing boils down to the 5 “I wills”

  • philip

    Look folks there is more than one view held by bible believing Christians on this. Both views are held and accepted by God fearing Jesus loving and bible believing followers of Christ.The young earth view , The Gap Theory and the Day Age are all views that have been around. Despite Mr Hams assertion that anyone who holds a different view is a compromise r is not only wrong but childish.

  • Abishai

    The Bible doesn’t speak to an old earth or a young earth. To find those answers, one must look to science…which is the study of the earth God created and draw conclusions from it. And the sciences and brains God has given us, point to the idea that the earth is very very old…Genesis cannot prove or disprove either camp.

article_images/God_Love_316422517.jpg

WATCH: Tim Keller: A Deeper Understanding of God’s Love

“Everything about God’s nature drives Him powerfully toward you.” Share this video with someone who needs to hear that today.