@Richard: If we hold ourselves to the same standard ("quoting peer-reviewed literature"), then I wonder if that means we'll have lop-sided answers, supporting old-earth/theistic evolution... since most young earth scientists aren't well respected by scientific peers in the scientific community
@Richard Although I don't think Skeptics.SE actually requires peer-reviewed literature only, as the OP of that meta question claims
@Flimzy Good point. I, personally, think that these questions should be migrated to Skeptics, since that's more of a scientific community for that purpose. These seem more like questions better suited for those communities.
If, on the other hand, we could come up with a good Young Earth question that was rooted in Christianity, I could see that belonging here. (Maybe "what biblical support is there for YEC?")
@Flimzy We only require reliable resources, peer-reviewed journals are ideal, but not absolutely required.
Questions about Creationism and YEC would be on-topic on Skeptics, though I would advise against directly migrating them. The communities and the requirements on answers and questions are just too different. The already posted ones especially should not be migrated, as most of the existing answers would violate our standards.
What are the common arguments from Christians against the idea that God used evolution to create Earth over millions of years? This is not a place to argue. I'm interested in a rundown of the common response from Young Earth Creationists. Source your statements whenever possible.
@waxeagle, @CiscoIPPhone: I'm only saying that I think it would be hard to find quality "peer-reviewed" literature from YEers... not because their views are invalid, but because most of their peers think they're nuts, and won't review their work.
Most (not all) YEers come from a theological background, rather than a scientific background... therefore most "scientists" don't consider them peers to be reviewed
@Flimzy IF their work is good and valid it will be properly peer reviewed. Because the current scientific establishment/evidence believes contrary, the burden of proof is on them. There isn't a "Science racket" that is preventing it from being published.
That may be an argument that there is weak science to support YEC, but I think that's beside the point.
@waxeagle Yeah, you may be right.
I think I would support a higher standard for questions on science... Although I wonder how reasonable it is to have different standards for different types of questions. Will that confuse people?
@JonathonByrd actually, no - the question asks where does the 6000-12000 year number come from. You only touch on this in the first line of the answer. The rest of the answer is your beliefs; the question did not ask for that.
"As a YEC believe that God is more then capable of creating everything in six days and that the earth is less than 10,000 years old." is perhaps the only part that comes close to the question asked by the OP, and that is not really very revealing.
There is a verse that i remember that talks about a father with two sons. The father gives money to both of his sons. One son invests his money and returns it to his father after becoming wealthy, or something like that, and the other son squanders it. If i remember correctly, even though the ...
First, this question assumes the Bible clearly states that homosexuality is a sin. If you disagree, that's a separate question.
Based on that assumption, my question is why is homosexuality a sin? My reasoning is that God defines something as a sin because it is harmful or not loving; He doesn't...
It has been stated to me that Christianity is "experiential" meaning it is experienced and not necessarily understood. Do I have that definition correct? Is this true?
@JonathonByrd: Generally, I don't believe Genesis 1 is God telling us "how" he did anything, but rather telling us that he did something.
If you've read my answer to the question about "How did light exist before the sun" then you'll see that I think Genesis 1 is also usually taken out of context by YECers
In my radiometric dating studies I've come across an individual that mentioned that the levels of carbon-14 are still increasing in our current atmosphere.
No sources were provided of course, thus I'm interested in knowing more. Are the current levels of carbon-14 on the rise? and how can one te...
I used to believe in evolution and God together for years, and then I came to my senses when the evidence would't add up. Sadly, I've since found a lot of cover up goes on, a lot of fellow youth leave the faith, etc. So, I refuse to back down on it.
@RolandTaylor If a YEC/OEC/athiestic evolution debate makes you emotional, I would respectfully suggest that you need to do some self-evaluation and prayer, so that you can more effectively and productively discuss the issues in the future
@RolandTaylor: especially *EC vs. athiesim... getting emotional in those debates is worse than uneffective... that's what the athiests usually want... so they count it as a victory
As for you and I, we both know why we believe what we believe, (YEC), so when needed, let us simply present our cases as best we can, and avoid arguments.
@Marc: Most ahtiests (in my experience) who get into a debate over creation vs. evolution, do enjoy when their opponent becomes emotionally irrational. Maybe that's not the intent of the athiest... but they find it fun/amusing when it happens.
@Marc: Of course, that is also a small subset of athiests... not all enjoy that sort of debate
I'm a young earth creationist.
No, not all Christians maintain this belief. Christians can identify themselves with two different categories, Young Earth Creationist (YEC) or Old Earth Creationist (OEC).
As a YEC believe that God is more then capable of creating everything in six days and that ...
@JonathonByrd: But then my view is that the evidence for a global flood, as well as 24-hour literal days, is grossly lacking--because, again in my own view--those things are not true.
@JonathonByrd Personally, I have nothing against YEC/OEC/Evolution questions. But I think they have to be specific enough so that they don't spark debate and enough about Christianity that they don't turn into science wars.
@JonathonByrd: So pointing out criticism in "scientific evidence" to support them makes sense. I would expect the same if one of my answers has questionable conclusions.
@Jonathan
@JonathonByrd So maybe what you're asking is "Are comments that disagree with the question allowed?"
@JonathonByrd: I agree that your answer was perfectly on topic to the question.
Assuming you can literally interpret "God created man in his own image," why would the Christian god have reproductive organs?
He is apparently not like the Greco-Roman gods who used their reproductive organs to mate with each other and humans and such.
Masturbation seems to be frowned upon i...
I have seen a few questions discussion science, such as this one:
What is the archaeological evidence for a global flood?
Others do it in the answers, but not in the question. I think that is bad, because many users get it wrong. And that is a problem. The Stack Exchange Network's formula con...
I agree the answer was probably on topic to the intent of the question (the actual question was about the reason for the dates) - however, in the same way that it would be expected to provide biblical reasoning for biblical claims, it should be reasonable to provide scientific reasoning for scientific claims (within the extent of the site's purpose)
@Richard I still have questions regarding creation and if I ask them on skeptics I get hated. SO YES when the bible states something I want to know from a christian perspective the answer
even if that question is asking about the bible and science
I would happily upvote an answer that provided more than a single link to a oft-refuted scientist (sorry, but he is), when making that many claims about different fields of science
@JonathonByrd Then I think you should post something on that question. I suspect that it will probably end up having quite a bit of say in the end results: meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/308/…
@djeikyb Right! The purpose of Genesis isn't to give us scientific proof of how the Earth was formed. That was merely an opening thought. Genesis was about the beginning and foundation of Judaism.
@JonathonByrd I'm a mod on Skeptic. What do you want to ask, and which of your questions on our site got you "hated" exactly? Of the two questions tied to your Christianity profile, none of them got much attention (i.e. not even an answer, and only one comment total).
@JonathonByrd I think I speak for everyone at Skeptic when I say we would love to create an atmosphere where religious people can get the facts behind any attempt at reconciliation they hear.
@Borror0 I love Skeptics.SE myself and I support moving science-y questions there in general. But topics like the relation of a scientific-ish theory to the Bible would be quite off-topic there.
What if we ask two questions... "What is Young Earth Creationism?" and "What is Old Earth Creationism?" This will give each side a chance to state their views, and Biblical basis for them...
@Borror0 If I believed in YEC and wanted to know how it fits with Genesis, it's better asked here. (and I at least think that might have been Jonathon's point.) I certainly see the problems with such questions even here: the answering easily turns discussion turns debate, with scientific or pseudo-scientific arguments thrown around...
@dancek My point is that scientific questions don't belong on this site, in the same way religious questions don't belong on Skeptic. Whether YEC is congruent with the Bible is a religious questions science. Thus, it belongs on Christianity.SE. Conversely, whether it is possible to fast for 40 days is a scientific question about religion.
"Both ideas start with the premise that God created. After this, I've heard tale of wars fought between the two camps. What is the gist of the differences between these two ideas?"
If you subscribe to the belief that Christianity was conceived by humans and not gods, then you can look at the Bible as more of the authors' idea of a "Guide for good living" rather than a religious text.
The authors apparently felt homosexuality was detrimental and/or offensive.
@Purmou The subject matter is the same but the guidelines, background conent and exact scope are quite different.
@Purmou No. Proper answers to your question would actually focus on YOUR situation, which is why it got closed.
We also should not be closing questions as duplicates using targets that are themselves closed for other reasons. The correct thing to do would be to close them for the other reason.
@aceinthehole I don't think so, perhaps just not worded it in a good way. I think he's trying to say god can't be disproven, so the burden is on the theists to prove it (because atheists can't disprove it)
@Caleb I didn't want to make it a bare question. I just provided personal backgronud information as an example. I'm not going to say "A lot of Christians doubt this..." because that's just assuming.
@Purmou SE sites are very much about paring things down to bare questions and answers. If the question needs background or an example, you can provide that, but leading with your personal background set the wrong stage for that question. As it stands I think the VTC was valid. If you want it re-opened try something more like the other question which was a replacement for yours without those issues.
I've heard that many believe that intelligent design is creationism by a different name.
However, if my understanding of intelligent design is correct, it does not deny the the big bang or evolution occurred. It does not even deny that bio genesis occurred by anything but natural means.
It ju...
@Caleb How would you recommend I rephrase the question?
I just think that if the community thinks it's a good question (which the 16 upvotes indicate), and this is a community-driven network, then it's a valid question.
@Purmou That's not necessarily true. In order to really test that you would also have to get the CONCEPT to fly on meta. Bikeshed questions are quite popular on SE networks and get boatloads of votes, but that doesn't make them good questions. I'm not saying this is a bikeshed question, just that upvotes on a question don't make it a good question.
@ElendiaStarman Yes, but I think it's going to suffer from the same problem the guys have been trying to hash out over creation issues. You're probably going to have to be even more specific than just covering one view .. more like one issue inside a view.
Also the Wikipedia documents you linked have supporting arguments and works of constituents of those views to peruse. What exactly would you like to learn?
In the meantime, I'm trying to think of a good question so that I have a good chance of getting Motorboard...only 45 minutes left and 32 rep to go! O.O
What are the common arguments from Christians against the idea that God used evolution to create Earth over millions of years? This is not a place to argue. I'm interested in a rundown of the common response from Young Earth Creationists. Source your statements whenever possible.
There is a verse that i remember that talks about a father with two sons. The father gives money to both of his sons. One son invests his money and returns it to his father after becoming wealthy, or something like that, and the other son squanders it. If i remember correctly, even though the ...
It has been stated to me that Christianity is "experiential" meaning it is experienced and not necessarily understood. Do I have that definition correct? Is this true?
Assuming you can literally interpret "God created man in his own image," why would the Christian god have reproductive organs?
He is apparently not like the Greco-Roman gods who used their reproductive organs to mate with each other and humans and such.
Masturbation seems to be frowned upon i...
I have seen a few questions discussion science, such as this one:
What is the archaeological evidence for a global flood?
Others do it in the answers, but not in the question. I think that is bad, because many users get it wrong. And that is a problem. The Stack Exchange Network's formula con...
Are there any biblical references that indicate that it's ok (or not ok) to bring any doubts to God in prayer?
I've heard that many believe that intelligent design is creationism by a different name.
However, if my understanding of intelligent design is correct, it does not deny the the big bang or evolution occurred. It does not even deny that bio genesis occurred by anything but natural means.
It ju...
