Were Early Church Fathers Young Earth Creationists?

[Stripe]

Everyone who didn't know the Earth was more than 6000 years old believed the Earth was only 6000 years old. :chuckle:

Doesn't really get much more simple than that. People who didn't know the Earth was a sphere thought existence was a snow globe, and they interpreted this from scriptures as well.

Ah, Crucifier is here with a logical fallacy, this one being petitio principii.

The point of the Bible is not to be a science book.

The Bible is the greatest science book ever written.

 

[Stripe]

What relevance does what the "early church fathers" believed, have on veracity? And what relevance does when you discover objective truth, in determining whether it is, in fact, objective truth, have?

That, "Watson" is the question.

I think the point was to refute those who say that "church fathers rejected YEC."

 

[Apple7]

What did the early church fathers believe about the lengths of creation days? The book entitled Creation and Time, by Dr. Hugh Ross documents in detail what first century Jewish scholars and the early Christian church fathers said regarding their interpretation of creation chronology (see Chapter 2, pages 16-24). Many early church fathers expressed no opinion on the subject of creation days, since it is a peripheral issue in Christianity. However, Jewish scholars who discussed creation chronology include Philo and Josephus, while Christian fathers include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus (through writings of Ambrose), Clement, Origen, Lactantius, Victorinus, Methodius, Augustine, Eusebius, Basil, and Ambrose. Among this group, all but one believed that the creation days were longer than 24 hours. The evidence presented in Creation and Time is both overwhelming and well documented (all references are given).

 

[User Name]

The Bible is the greatest science book ever written.

...said no scientist ever.

 

[6days]

The point of the Bible is not to be a science book.

The point of this thread is to show that the early church fathers understood the importance of a young earth in relationship to the Gospel.... Contrary to the claims of many theistic evolutionists.

 

[User Name]

The point of this thread is to show that the early church fathers understood the importance of a young earth in relationship to the Gospel.

Do you believe everything the early church fathers believed?

 

[6days]

You are obviously unaware that the genealogy in the Septuagint is longer, and so it explains the ECF +2000 miscalculation.

You still have not explained what point you are trying to make...or is there a point? The early church fathers were young earth creationists, no matter if they used the Hebrew or the Greek...no matter if they used the LLC or the MT. As I stated earlier, the genealogies all lead to a creation event less than 10,000 years ago.

 

[6days]

Do you believe everything the early church fathers believed?

As stated in the Op... The point is to refute theistic evolutionists who claim the early church fathers believed in an old earth... they didn't.

 

[6days]

Many early church fathers expressed no opinion on the subject of creation days, since it is a peripheral issue in Christianity.

You have been decieved by Hugh Ross it seems. As shown in the OP, the early church fathers almost universally argued for a young earth. Ross wants you to believe Genesis is peripheral, yet it it is the foundation to the Gospel and virtually every Christian doctrine.

However, Jewish scholars who discussed creation chronology include Philo and Josephus, while Christian fathers include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus (through writings of Ambrose), Clement, Origen, Lactantius, Victorinus, Methodius, Augustine, Eusebius, Basil, and Ambrose. Among this group, all but one believed that the creation days were longer than 24 hours. The evidence presented in Creation and Time is both overwhelming and well documented (all references are given).

Apple... You need do a wee bit of research. Many of the names you use are young earth creationists. Perhaps read the OP where quotes are provided. For example Augustine said "Unbelievers are also deceived by false documents which ascribe to history many thousand years, although we can calculate from Sacred Scripture that not 6,000 years have passed since the creation of man."

 

[User Name]

As stated in the Op... The point is to refute theistic evolutionists who claim the early church fathers believed in an old earth... they didn't.

Therefore...rabbit trails?

Why is it relevant one way or the other what some "early church fathers" believed?

 

[Stripe]

Therefore...rabbit trails?

Why is it relevant one way or the other what some "early church fathers" believed?

Is reading your second language?

The point is to refute theistic evolutionists who claim the early church fathers believed in an old earth... they didn't.

I think the point was to refute those who say that "church fathers rejected YEC."

Or you could read OP.

 

[User Name]

Is reading your second language?

My point is, so what?

 

[Stripe]

My point is, so what?

I think if you really put your mind to it, you just might figure it out. :up:

 

[User Name]

I think if you really put your mind to it, you just might figure it out. :up:

Well yes, but if the opinions of the early church fathers are frankly irrelevant and may be dismissed out of hand on other issues, why should their opinions matter on this one? What difference does it make?

 

[Stripe]

Well yes, but if the opinions of the early church fathers are frankly irrelevant and may be dismissed out of hand on other issues, why should their opinions matter on this one? What difference does it make?

If you think. It requires thought, not simple repetition of your useless post.

Read OP. Think. :up:

 

[User Name]

If you think. It requires thought, not simple repetition of what you thought was a useful post.

Read OP. Think.

The OP is irrelevant if the opinions of the early church fathers don't make no nevermind nohow.

 

[Stripe]

The OP is irrelevant if the opinions of the early church fathers don't make no nevermind nohow.

It requires you to think. Read. Think. :up:

 

[6days]

The OP is irrelevant if the opinions of the early church fathers don't make no nevermind nohow.

If the OP is irrelevant to you... Ignore it.

The OP is relevant to theistic evolutionists who falsely claim the early church fathers believed in an old earth.

 

[john w]

I think the point was to refute those who say that "church fathers rejected YEC."

And I know that you/most missed my point.

 

[Stripe]

And I know that you/most missed my point.

Well, I'm not as cool as you by far, but I think your point would be that we should stick to what the Bible says rather than the opinions of men, even if they are "church fathers."

I would agree.

However, that is beyond the scope of OP and the refutation of those who say their opinions were anti-YEC.