I reread your comments but I was confused at a couple of points. The first is when you mentioned a “plain reading of the Bible.” I’m not really sure what that is.

The second was this sentence–I wondered if you could clarify:

“Indeed it does say that people who believe today will be like tomorrow because its always have been the name… ”

I think you were describing naturalism but I am still lost as to what naturalism is. Maybe you’re using the term to describe being an evolutionist?

rc sproul has changed from an old earth to a young earth creationist. its not about being a fundie. its about, are we willing to believe in the bible, even if culture or academia mocks us? or any truth in general?

hope you like the article. i’m not really moses… but pseudepigrapha works!

Only recently have people had synchronistic beliefs between naturalism and creationism. Believing in an old earth is not based in biblical belief but a “commitment to naturalism.” Why is it so important to consider science as more accurate than what was divinely revealed to Moses by the voice of God. A plain reading of the bible never yields a history of the earth anywhere near a million years. Indeed it does say that people who believe today will be like tomorrow because its always have been the name… a quick description of uniformation naturalism… are considered to be mocking god and saying that he is powerless. even peter warns that the end will come like the flood came at noah’s era.

Most people turn to old earth creationism because they really just want the respect of teh academic community. who wants to look stupid infront of academia? BUT the truth is that the commitment to uniform naturalism cannot be synchronized with creationism. the premises are wrong.

with evolution, man is kicked up from lightning and mud and has gradually improved himself by mindless mutations that all have equal possibility until we arrive at modern man. this denies that there was ever a fall, or that god had any hand in creation at all. so basically the premise is that there is no god to start with… thats how you end up with millions of years.

there is no such thing as objective observation. the bible is clear that although our sinfulness is clearly exposed by all creation, we are unable to know god or find him on our own. this is why we need a christ to save us. otherwise we are the natural man. 1 cor 2:14 its impossible to know god by our own observation. this is the pride of man, who thinks he knows better than what god has told us.

are you going to believe the words of god spoken to moses that still are a stumbling block after after 3500 years? or the naturalism talk of things will always be, that is always put the shame by god?

If there was no fall, things have always been as they will be, no miracles, then there’s no need for christ, and we have no savior and no hope for a supernatural deliver. If we cannot believe the world was created, then how can we believe that the world will be released from its curse?

the only time we try to reconcile them is when we have our own best interest in mind, and not in what is true.