The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Young earth creationism & 40000 year old frozen wolf

The fundies will probably champion… “ fake news!!
Yes, just like the moon landings :smile:

It seems like this thread is just an opportunity to mock brothers and sisters in Christ who hold to a different perspective. I think that says far more about ourselves than it does about them.

1 Like

Oops John… let’s see if my post gets flagged?

1 Like

The funny thing is on another forum where I made the same post, one of these brothers or sisters in Christ did indeed respond “fake news”.


You two give me lots to think about and I’m grateful for that. I hope you are both keeping well. I do more reading than writing these days but I’ll have a go at starting a thread.
God bless.

1 Like

“This universe that we live in is 14 billion years old and there’s no question about it and we have tremendous geological records and all the rest of it and that 6,000 year stuff just doesn’t compute,”
Pat Robertson - 700 Club April 30th 2019

This is actually a huge favor to us all. Christians generally don’t face new truth en masse until someone of enough clout gives them permission to.

Christians don’t assert young earth because they see it in the bible as much as they have been taught by men they are bad if they don’t read it that way.

Shame and approval are powerful formative forces. Thats why Eternal Conscious Torment is so widely accepted.

How were they able to date it at 40,000 years?

Tori Herridge, an evolutionary biologist at London’s Natural History Museum, witnessed the head’s discovery in August 2018. She performed carbon dating on the tissue and tweeted that it was about 32,000 years old.


@Invernessian - what say you, Norm my friend?

Would like to add - there was some new rock formation near the Hawaiian Islands around the late 70’s. They tested the rock using various forms of dating, including Potassium/Argon dating which is considered the best way (better than carbon dating). It showed that the newly formed rock was roughly 1.2 million years old based off of that data. That ended up being a bit off. Don’t think we should be coming to quick conclusions with this sort of stuff when the science behind it is very new.

FYI - haven’t looked at the study in a while so my numbers may be a bit off.

Here’s the Orthodox position on this subject:

Evolution or Creation Science?

Here’s an interesting statement, from the article:

These are the real lessons of Genesis. It has nothing to say, for or against, the theory of evolution. Its true lessons are located elsewhere.

So what about dinosaurs? I happily leave them in the museums, to the makers of movies (I love “Jurassic Park”), and the writers of National Geographic . The creation stories of Genesis give me lots to ponder and to live up to without multiplying mysteries. As Mark Twain once said, “It ain’t those parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me; it’s the parts I do understand.”

1 Like

Some philosophical assumptions of radiometric dating:

  • The initial conditions are known

  • The decay rate is constant

  • The system is closed

Regarding some concerns about Carbon-14 Dating in particular:

Greetings Pastor Mark,

You might like to do an internet search using the question, “Is carbon dating accurate?” I think you will find that it is highly questionable according to many experts.

Yes sir, I am familiar with that argument. However, I was simply providing you with the original source you requested.

And very reliable according to many experts. I do find it odd that a dating system such as this one could be off by, say, 2 million years? A billion? I could understand an error factor of 100,000 years, but not 2 million. But then I’m a cranky, old-earth young-human person.

1 Like

We are talking about only 40000 years here not millions so any deficiencies in dating will be very small for this relatively small number of years but even if it were off by 50% which it isn’t, it would still make the wolf’s head older than 10000 years.

Another thing - look at the size of the head. This wolf was much bigger than any around today or in the recent past.

There is a quote, I always like:

In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity

The author ties this quote to

Often attributed to great theologians such as Augustine, it comes from an otherwise undistinguished German Lutheran theologian of the early seventeenth century, Rupertus Meldenius.

So I look at young earth vs old earth, big bang vs non-big bang, evolution vs non-evolution, etc. - as nonessentials to the faith. And they only address the “how” - NOT the “why”.

Even my theory that Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) …is the most probable, end-times tribulation scenerio…is really “non-essential” to the faith.

And I’m open to other answers. I can easily envision a world…where AI from the Terminator series and the Matrix series…coexists with Zombies from The Walking Dead and Fear the Walking Dead. And we might become, “stuck in the middle”.

On the one hand, we might have this!

And on the other hand, we might also have this!

I surely don’t believe that this issue is critical for faith or fellowship - not ‘essential’ in HF’s patois - but I still find it very interesting, and people’s thinking on it even more interesting.
One church here in the Rogue Valley of southern Oregon makes young-earthism the FIRST item in their statement of faith!

Looks to me like everybody here are nothing but charitable. Now how bout that wolf! LOL

I’m thinkin’ GOT dire wolf…

1 Like

In theory views on creationism are not important to practicing faith but in practice it damages the church’s witness because many who have this viewpoint attack science and scientists. That might be fine if the holders of such views completely eschewed the products of science like medicine, cars etc. But to say science is flawed while relying on it to live comfortably leaves people with that view open to accusations of hypocricy which is damaging to the church’s witness.