Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Homeschooling Moms Homeschooling Moms

Old Earth, Young Minds: Evengelical Homeschoolers Embrace Evolution

An article I found that talks about science education for Christians who are not proponents of a "young earth."

homeschool-top.jpg Jen Baird Seurkamp, a Kentucky evangelical who homeschools her children, avoids textbooks that discredit evolution. (Kate Mitchell Hisey)

For homeschooling parents who want to teach their children that the earth is only a few thousand years old, the theory of evolution is a lie, and dinosaurs coexisted with humans, there is no shortage of materials. Kids can start with the Answers in Genesis curriculum, which features books such as Dinosaurs of Eden, written by Creation Museum founder Ken Ham. As the publisher's description states, "This exciting book for the entire family uses the Bible as a 'time machine' to journey through the events of the past and future."

It's no secret that the majority of homeschooled children in America belong to evangelical Christian families. What's less known is that a growing number of their parents are dismayed by these textbooks.

Take Erinn Cameron Warton, an evangelical Christian who homeschools her children. Warton, a scientist, says she was horrified when she opened a homeschool science textbook and found a picture of Adam and Eve putting a saddle on a dinosaur. "I nearly choked," says the mother of three.

For the rest of the article CLICK HERE.

SusanTheWriter ~ Wife, Mom, Author

by on Mar. 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM
Replies (31-40):
Dawn07
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:50 PM
2 moms liked this
What if God did create the earth in 7days, but as a "mature" planet. In its mature state it would seem to be older than it actually was created.

If God created Adam and Eve as fully grown adults then they would have seemed older than what they might have actually been. Example: the day after Adam was made he would have literally been only a day old, but by looking at him he would look, idk let's say 30.

Just something I've thought about along with everything else. I hope it's not confusing, I'm mobile.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Dawn07
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 6:53 PM
1 mom liked this
Lol thanks. I was wanting to make sure I was on the same page.

Quoting mem82:

Old Earth = The planet is millions and millions of years old as per Scientist using carbon dating

Young Earth= The Earth is only 7,000 years old created in 6 24 hour periods as per Genesis.

LOL That's the Cliffnotes version.

Quoting Dawn07:

Question: what is old earth creationism and what is young earth creationism? At least the basic concept of each?


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
SusanTheWriter
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:24 PM

You mean he placed fossils in layers of earth as some cosmic joke? I've met people who believe that.

I don't.

Quoting Dawn07:

What if God did create the earth in 7days, but as a "mature" planet. In its mature state it would seem to be older than it actually was created.

If God created Adam and Eve as fully grown adults then they would have seemed older than what they might have actually been. Example: the day after Adam was made he would have literally been only a day old, but by looking at him he would look, idk let's say 30.

Just something I've thought about along with everything else. I hope it's not confusing, I'm mobile.


Dawn07
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:30 PM
I believe the fossils in the different layers were caused by the flood.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

You mean he placed fossils in layers of earth as some cosmic joke? I've met people who believe that.

I don't.

Quoting Dawn07:

What if God did create the earth in 7days, but as a "mature" planet. In its mature state it would seem to be older than it actually was created.


If God created Adam and Eve as fully grown adults then they would have seemed older than what they might have actually been. Example: the day after Adam was made he would have literally been only a day old, but by looking at him he would look, idk let's say 30.


Just something I've thought about along with everything else. I hope it's not confusing, I'm mobile.


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
SusanTheWriter
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Actually, that archaeological and mythological record supports the Biblical truth, rather than the other way around. I have no issue with the idea that a people who didn't even know Australia existed, but watched their entire civilization be wiped out by a flood, can certainly be expected to believe that the destruction was world-wide. Far from what you suggest as a lessening of faith, I find the Bible stands up well as a historical record with the understanding that it's the record of a specific culture in a specific time.

Quoting gratefulgal:


which is what I'm saying. If you believe in evolution, it also takes other things out of the bible, such as Adam and Eve and other stories. Christians are choosing to believe in a changed bible, one that fits what everyone else thinks.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that a flood did occur as described in Noah's story. It devastated a huge area of what's now known as the Middle East, but it wasn't literally global. You can find records of a similar event - including a Noah figure - in all the mythology of the area from Persia to India, but not in, say, Australia or South America. So the Bible is accurate insofar as it records the flood covering the world that was known to the Israelites at the time, but not as we've come to know the world.




gratefulgal
by Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 7:49 PM

 

So the bible is more of a history text written by, say, the inhabitants of that region, as opposed to a document meant to help guide our lives and given to us by our Lord God. It seems that thereis belief in biblical facts, but only if someone else who is not Christian believes them, too.

By the way carbon dating is NOT an exact science. They STILL don't know how old the Grand Canyon is, and while it seems to be older than 8 thousand years or so, there is talk that it isn't as old as they once suspected.

As per PP and the fosils, she was talking about the fact that  a major flood can mimic the effects of thousands of years of age by just the sheer pressure.

Evolution and the Big Bang were theories developed by scientists to explain the mysteries of the universe for those who did not accept the possiblity of God. So why are Christians just going along with it? Along with evolution goes biological issues and natural selection, and that we find mates solely based on insitinct and hormones, that men can't help but cheat on their because "they were biologically desiged" to spread their seed as much as possible. So just out of evolution came a species that can commune with God and who has a soul? That's how that happened? Really?   

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, that archaeological and mythological record supports the Biblical truth, rather than the other way around. And the fact that a people who didn't even know Australia existed, but watched their entire civilization be wiped out by a flood, can certainly be expected to believe that the destruction was world-wide. Far from what you suggest as a lessening of faith, I find the Bible stands up well as a historical record with the understanding that it's the record of a specific culture in a specific time.

Quoting gratefulgal:

 

which is what I'm saying. If you believe in evolution, it also takes other things out of the bible, such as Adam and Eve and other stories. Christians are choosing to believe in a changed bible, one that fits what everyone else thinks.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that a flood did occur as described in Noah's story. It devastated a huge area of what's now known as the Middle East, but it wasn't literally global. You can find records of a similar event - including a Noah figure - in all the mythology of the area from Persia to India, but not in, say, Australia or South America. So the Bible is accurate insofar as it records the flood covering the world that was known to the Israelites at the time, but not as we've come to know the world.

 

 



 

SusanTheWriter
by Bronze Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 8:36 PM
1 mom liked this
Okay, you're obviously getting very upset about this issue. There are many people here who have differing views. For those of us who believe in an Old Earth Creation, understand that we're not dismissing God's hand in Creation at all. If you read over the responses, you'll find unanimous consent for that belief. Whether it took 6 days or millions of years is not an issue that determines salvation, therefore, we're allowed to disagree respectfully.
Quoting gratefulgal:

 

So the bible is more of a history text written by, say, the inhabitants of that region, as opposed to a document meant to help guide our lives and given to us by our Lord God. It seems that thereis belief in biblical facts, but only if someone else who is not Christian believes them, too.

By the way carbon dating is NOT an exact science. They STILL don't know how old the Grand Canyon is, and while it seems to be older than 8 thousand years or so, there is talk that it isn't as old as they once suspected.

As per PP and the fosils, she was talking about the fact that  a major flood can mimic the effects of thousands of years of age by just the sheer pressure.

Evolution and the Big Bang were theories developed by scientists to explain the mysteries of the universe for those who did not accept the possiblity of God. So why are Christians just going along with it? Along with evolution goes biological issues and natural selection, and that we find mates solely based on insitinct and hormones, that men can't help but cheat on their because "they were biologically desiged" to spread their seed as much as possible. So just out of evolution came a species that can commune with God and who has a soul? That's how that happened? Really?   

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, that archaeological and mythological record supports the Biblical truth, rather than the other way around. And the fact that a people who didn't even know Australia existed, but watched their entire civilization be wiped out by a flood, can certainly be expected to believe that the destruction was world-wide. Far from what you suggest as a lessening of faith, I find the Bible stands up well as a historical record with the understanding that it's the record of a specific culture in a specific time.

Quoting gratefulgal:

 

which is what I'm saying. If you believe in evolution, it also takes other things out of the bible, such as Adam and Eve and other stories. Christians are choosing to believe in a changed bible, one that fits what everyone else thinks.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that a flood did occur as described in Noah's story. It devastated a huge area of what's now known as the Middle East, but it wasn't literally global. You can find records of a similar event - including a Noah figure - in all the mythology of the area from Persia to India, but not in, say, Australia or South America. So the Bible is accurate insofar as it records the flood covering the world that was known to the Israelites at the time, but not as we've come to know the world.

 

 



 

katinahat
by Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:35 PM

Part of the Bible is historical-- when Moses wrote about wandering in the desert for forty years, he was writing about an event that was happening in his life. Other parts of the Bible are instructive-- when Paul wrote about not quarreling over disputable matters, for instance, he was giving an instruction to the church. Not sure what you're trying to communicate here.

Radiocarbon dating-- which is really not only radioactive dating using carbon, but also potassium-argon and uranium-lead-- is reasonably accurate, though the accuracy depends on the method used. Uranium-lead dating has 2-5% error and radiocarbon dating has an error margin of only 163 years for ages all the way up to 26,000 years BP.

For the Grand Canyon, that's bologna. http://www.nature.nps.gov/geology/parks/grca/age/image_popup/yardstick.htm

A major flood can mimic SOME effects, but not others. A flood cannot (to my knowledge) cause an acceleration in radioactive decay.

There are a LOT of Christian scientists who have worked on modern theories, like the Big Bang. Have you ever thought that maybe the theories were created by scientists who were just curious about how the universe worked? Or maybe even that they were curious about how GOD works?? I want to know how God created the universe-- I think that He is brilliant and fascinating and I truly believe that He wants us to be curious about His methods. I will never fully understand or conceptualize His greatness and His creativity, but if I can even understand one iota of it, I will be a happy woman. I have a thirst to know as much about Him as I can, and Romans 1:20 says, "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." I have seen God's invisible qualities-- His power and His divinity-- IN His creation! And I am thirsty to know Him because of it. I am thirsty to know about His universal creation. I in no way believe that that is a sin.

Where on Earth are you getting that believing in the Big Bang = men have no choice but to be unfaithful? You totally lost me there-- I think that you're grasping at straws and using incredibly shaky and faulty logic.

What do you mean "just out of evolution"? Have you been reading what I and others have been typing? What if evolution WAS the method of God's creation? What if evolution was the potter's hands shaping His children into the world? I in no way believe that God "just started it". I think that God has been here the entire time, carefully guiding each detail of the process.

Quoting gratefulgal:


So the bible is more of a history text written by, say, the inhabitants of that region, as opposed to a document meant to help guide our lives and given to us by our Lord God. It seems that thereis belief in biblical facts, but only if someone else who is not Christian believes them, too.

By the way carbon dating is NOT an exact science. They STILL don't know how old the Grand Canyon is, and while it seems to be older than 8 thousand years or so, there is talk that it isn't as old as they once suspected.

As per PP and the fosils, she was talking about the fact that  a major flood can mimic the effects of thousands of years of age by just the sheer pressure.

Evolution and the Big Bang were theories developed by scientists to explain the mysteries of the universe for those who did not accept the possiblity of God. So why are Christians just going along with it? Along with evolution goes biological issues and natural selection, and that we find mates solely based on insitinct and hormones, that men can't help but cheat on their because "they were biologically desiged" to spread their seed as much as possible. So just out of evolution came a species that can commune with God and who has a soul? That's how that happened? Really?   

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, that archaeological and mythological record supports the Biblical truth, rather than the other way around. And the fact that a people who didn't even know Australia existed, but watched their entire civilization be wiped out by a flood, can certainly be expected to believe that the destruction was world-wide. Far from what you suggest as a lessening of faith, I find the Bible stands up well as a historical record with the understanding that it's the record of a specific culture in a specific time.

Quoting gratefulgal:


which is what I'm saying. If you believe in evolution, it also takes other things out of the bible, such as Adam and Eve and other stories. Christians are choosing to believe in a changed bible, one that fits what everyone else thinks.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that a flood did occur as described in Noah's story. It devastated a huge area of what's now known as the Middle East, but it wasn't literally global. You can find records of a similar event - including a Noah figure - in all the mythology of the area from Persia to India, but not in, say, Australia or South America. So the Bible is accurate insofar as it records the flood covering the world that was known to the Israelites at the time, but not as we've come to know the world.








____________________________________________________________

Christian, vaccinating, fun-loving, breastfeeding, cloth diapering, positive disciplining, nerdy, extended rear-facing, bookworm, creative, outdoorsy, autodidactic, friendly family.

"If you judge people, you have no time to love them." -- Mother Teresa

AutymsMommy
by Silver Member on Mar. 11, 2013 at 9:52 PM

A catholic priest PROPOSED the big bang!


Quoting gratefulgal:


So the bible is more of a history text written by, say, the inhabitants of that region, as opposed to a document meant to help guide our lives and given to us by our Lord God. It seems that thereis belief in biblical facts, but only if someone else who is not Christian believes them, too.

By the way carbon dating is NOT an exact science. They STILL don't know how old the Grand Canyon is, and while it seems to be older than 8 thousand years or so, there is talk that it isn't as old as they once suspected.

As per PP and the fosils, she was talking about the fact that  a major flood can mimic the effects of thousands of years of age by just the sheer pressure.

Evolution and the Big Bang were theories developed by scientists to explain the mysteries of the universe for those who did not accept the possiblity of God. So why are Christians just going along with it? Along with evolution goes biological issues and natural selection, and that we find mates solely based on insitinct and hormones, that men can't help but cheat on their because "they were biologically desiged" to spread their seed as much as possible. So just out of evolution came a species that can commune with God and who has a soul? That's how that happened? Really?   

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, that archaeological and mythological record supports the Biblical truth, rather than the other way around. And the fact that a people who didn't even know Australia existed, but watched their entire civilization be wiped out by a flood, can certainly be expected to believe that the destruction was world-wide. Far from what you suggest as a lessening of faith, I find the Bible stands up well as a historical record with the understanding that it's the record of a specific culture in a specific time.

Quoting gratefulgal:


which is what I'm saying. If you believe in evolution, it also takes other things out of the bible, such as Adam and Eve and other stories. Christians are choosing to believe in a changed bible, one that fits what everyone else thinks.

Quoting SusanTheWriter:

Actually, there's plenty of evidence that a flood did occur as described in Noah's story. It devastated a huge area of what's now known as the Middle East, but it wasn't literally global. You can find records of a similar event - including a Noah figure - in all the mythology of the area from Persia to India, but not in, say, Australia or South America. So the Bible is accurate insofar as it records the flood covering the world that was known to the Israelites at the time, but not as we've come to know the world.








I am a Home Schooling, Vaccinating, Non spanking, Nightmare Cuddling, Dessert Giving, Bedtime Kissing, Book Reading, Stay at Home Mom. I believe in the benefit of organized after school activities and nosy, involved parents. I believe in spoiling my children. I believe that I have seen the village and I do not want it anywhere near my children. Now for the controversial stuff: we have traditional gender roles, we're Catholic, I'm Libertarian, he's Republican, we're both conservative, and we own guns (now there's no need to ask, lol).             Aimee














Pukalani79
by Kristin on Mar. 11, 2013 at 10:22 PM
2 moms liked this

 That was kind of my thought too.  I dont want to get in a big debate about it, but I believe in the young earth.  I believe in the literal 6 days of creation.  I believe that dinosaurs and humans coexisted until shortly after the global flood.  Is it a salvation issue? I don't believe so. It's definitely a devisive one though.

Quoting redhead-bedhead:

rolling on floor@ Adam and Eve saddling a dinosaur.

I just had a hilarious mental picture.

 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)