User talk:Joshlight

Welcome to the CreationWiki!

We thank the Lord for your willingness to serve Him by participating in the development of this educational resource. The CreationWiki is a collaborative effort and your help is needed. Our hope is that by working together we can build an archive of knowledge that will spread the truth of His creation throughout the world.

Please note that only creationists are permitted to edit articles. New editors are encouraged to visit the community portal to find ways of getting involved. It is also important to familiarize yourself with policy, such as the requirements for uploading images. The CreationWiki has been equipped with numerous help files that are essential for people unfamiliar with editing using the Mediawiki software.


 * Policy - We now ask that editors provide references to support all article content.
 * Creating a new page - Simply enter a title for your new article and click "Create page".
 * Editing Help - Authoring within the CreationWiki may require a little education.
 * Formatting Help - Formatting pictures and creating tables will help make your pages professional.


 * Please feel free to delete this message from your user-talk page after viewing... Ashcraft - (talk) 14:05, 15 February 2014 (EST)

Young earth evidence
Hey good edit on accelerated decay rates on Young earth evidence. That article dealing with changing decay rates due to solar flares from Stanford was fascinating when I found it!--Tsommer 22:56, 24 February 2014 (EST)

thanks for that. I will try my best to over-reference anything I add :)

are you a young earth creationist?
I am a young earth creationist who was convinced based on the evidence. I had already believed what the Scripture said about the creation of the world but this was accepted on faith rather than sight. Once I started a deliberate study of the evidence for a young earth and the lack thereof for an old one, this led in one direction, that of a young earth. Those who accept an old earth and cosmos are basing their judgments on the flawed interpretations of people who are biased in favor of naturalistic conclusions.

In purely evidentiary terms, in the end, what a person accepts is based on faith, because we cannot go back in time. When we truly understand where we are placing our faith, in (a) the flawed and ever-changing interpretations of fallible humans or (b) the eyewitness accounts of people who were there, the preponderance of evidence falls in favor of (b).

Jesus Christ of Nazareth spoke of Adam, Eve, Noah, Lot, Abraham, Sodom, the Flood etc. all in terms of their reality and their presence in recent history. He claimed that he spoke of earthly things to explain heavenly things. If he was so completely wrong in these foundational matters, why would anyone want to follow him for the more superficial ones? I've heard people say that they do not accept Christ's teachings on these things but would follow him for the stuff in the "be kind to your neighbor" category. In plain terms, they are saying they will follow the moral teachings of someone they think is deceived or deceiving in the most foundational parts of his doctrines. How can one mentally, spiritually or ethically justify such a dichotomy?

Conversely, Christ's ministry toward the religious leaders of the time was if anything, a corrective ministry. He was unafraid to "throw down" on the Pharisees for their deviations from God's spirit, intent and letter of the Scripture, in very controversial terms. The religious leaders of the time believed in a young earth and cosmos, yet Christ never corrected them on it. Such an open correction would have produced spiritual earthquakes in the religious leadership and would surely have garnered someone's attention to write it down (considering they wrote down details that were far less significant). Christ's silence on the matter also stands as an example of his agreement on it.

do you believe in a global flood?
As Ken Ham is quoted "billion of dead things, trapped in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth" is an immutable reality that deserves extraordinary attention and a solid answer.

That over 90 percent of all living creatures are represented in the fossil record is clear evidence of a single extinction event. That more and more evidence (e.g. blood and DNA in dinosaur bones) confirm that this event was quite recent, make it all the more obvious that the global flood is the foundation stone for all we see around us.

Jesus Christ of Nazareth spoke of Noah in terms of his Second Coming ("as in the days of Noah") and spoke of Adam, Eve, Noah and the Flood as real. Jesus also claimed that he used earthly things to describe heavenly things. Was Christ mistaken, deceived or deceiving? No, the Flood is a part of real earth history.

Cosmology article
Hi!

I wrote some sugestions in the Cosmology talk page

I hope it can be usable suggestions. Sincerely, Luiz Alexandre Silva 12:53, 3 March 2014 (EST)