RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or Theistic Evolution
View related threads:
(in this forum
| in all forums)
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/10/2008 6:41:24 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3128
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
Writing something as history doesn't make it history As usual, cow, it boils down to our 180 degree different acceptance of the Word of God as inerrant and authoritative communication. I absolutely believe that when God wrote something as history, it was indeed historical fact. However you want to believe God's reliability as a Truthful Historian is your business (and His!)
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/10/2008 6:50:48 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3539
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Writing something as history doesn't make it history As usual, cow, it boils down to our 180 degree different acceptance of the Word of God as inerrant and authoritative communication. I absolutely believe that when God wrote something as history, it was indeed historical fact. However you want to believe God's reliability as a Truthful Historian is your business (and His!)
Yes, Biblical inerrancy is an issue. As you point out frequently, the reason to support YEC is a religious one.
_____________________________
Wer weiß, was Übel im Herzen der Männer lauert? Nur der Schatten weiß. Giants 17 Patriots 14.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/10/2008 6:58:10 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3128
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
As is the reason to support evolutionism!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/10/2008 7:21:10 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 587
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
Evolution would be considered a non-cultic pagan religion by philosophers such as Clouser (The Myth of Religious Neutrality), and his predecessors such as Dooyeweerd and Kuyper.
I would highly suggest checking out Clouser's book. It is a bit heady, but he manages to give a definition of religious belief that actually encompasses all beliefs that really are religious beliefs. Materialistic humanism definitely makes the list.
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/11/2008 5:49:25 AM
|
|
|
car2ner
Posts: 1875
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: just south of Atlanta GA
Status: offline
|
quote:
The more you explain the less literal it sounds.
While I have some serious questions about the validity of evolution, I also wonder how to justify discoveries with biblical text. IMO the six days may not have been six days of playing-in-the-dirt. But I also believe in an actual adam and eve. So where does that leave me? Knowing that I don't know what I don't know. I cannot see the picture on the cross word puzzle because I don't have all the pieces. Just because two pieces don't fit together doesn't mean they aren't from the same puzzle.
_____________________________
the journal of selling my wonderful home http://www.car2ner.2ya.com (my blog)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/11/2008 6:26:56 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3128
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
While I have some serious questions about the validity of evolution, I also wonder how to justify discoveries with biblical text. I hope you meant how to interpret scientific discoveries in light of a creationist worldview based solely on the biblical text. That would be the correct way to approach origins science instead of presupposing zillions of years of evolution and then trying to justify Scripture to make ends meet. We've seen plenty of that on these S&O threads!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/11/2008 11:18:26 AM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 306
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
While I have some serious questions about the validity of evolution, I also wonder how to justify discoveries with biblical text. I hope you meant how to interpret scientific discoveries in light of a creationist worldview based solely on the biblical text. That would be the correct way to approach origins science instead of presupposing zillions of years of evolution and then trying to justify Scripture to make ends meet. We've seen plenty of that on these S&O threads!
Thats the same approach they used when they put Galileo under Inquisition for supporting heliocentrism. If you manage to put the literal interpretation of the Bible as the ultimate authority of science, you will literally be sewing the destruction of the USA in no uncertain terms.
Tell me... what do you think about Biblical passages instructing you for the proper way to beat your slaves? Should we take those literally too?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/11/2008 1:02:44 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 393
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
While I have some serious questions about the validity of evolution, I also wonder how to justify discoveries with biblical text. I hope you meant how to interpret scientific discoveries in light of a creationist worldview based solely on the biblical text. That would be the correct way to approach origins science instead of presupposing zillions of years of evolution and then trying to justify Scripture to make ends meet. We've seen plenty of that on these S&O threads!
Thats the same approach they used when they put Galileo under Inquisition for supporting heliocentrism. If you manage to put the literal interpretation of the Bible as the ultimate authority of science, you will literally be sewing the destruction of the USA in no uncertain terms.
Tell me... what do you think about Biblical passages instructing you for the proper way to beat your slaves? Should we take those literally too?
I'm thinking that's going to take this thread to a way-off-topic tangent. There are perfectly good answers to that question that can be taken elsewhere. It is a perfectly legitimate question, though.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/12/2008 4:32:24 PM
|
|
|
DonnyPauling
Posts: 8
Joined: 10/10/2006
From: Chico, Ca
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
I believe that if you take the Bible by itself, there really is no way to escape a young earth conclusion.
But, when you try to remove God from the picture and begin down the evolutionary road, you have to start doing silly things to make the Bible fit modern science, things like making up a gap of millions of years between creation days, or making creation days be millions of years instead of the literal days they plainly are.
I have a hard time trying to make the Bible fit the latest "fact" to come down the science pipeline, and will happily remain a believer in a 10,000 year-old or younger earth.
As I wrote in another thread:
I don't know why it's so hard to see that Genesis 1:1 describes evolution. Science and religion are not in conflict. Science is simply beginning to explain how God created earth. The "days" in Genesis were not literal 24 hour periods. They were "ages" (read this article).
Let's compare evolution with creation in Genesis, shall we?
In Genesis,
* there is a "big bang" when everything is spoken into existence... one second it's not there, the next it is.
* on earth, water separates from land, less complex creatures are created, more complex creatures are created, etc etc... finally man is created.
That's pretty much what evolution teaches as well. Where's the conflict?
The link posted where I wrote "read this article" gives a lot of useful information. I'd suggest reading it.
_____________________________
Can a former porn producer be forgiven? Read my story:
http://www.donnysramblings.com/about/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/12/2008 6:18:00 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 393
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DonnyPauling
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
I believe that if you take the Bible by itself, there really is no way to escape a young earth conclusion.
But, when you try to remove God from the picture and begin down the evolutionary road, you have to start doing silly things to make the Bible fit modern science, things like making up a gap of millions of years between creation days, or making creation days be millions of years instead of the literal days they plainly are.
I have a hard time trying to make the Bible fit the latest "fact" to come down the science pipeline, and will happily remain a believer in a 10,000 year-old or younger earth.
As I wrote in another thread:
I don't know why it's so hard to see that Genesis 1:1 describes evolution. Science and religion are not in conflict. Science is simply beginning to explain how God created earth. The "days" in Genesis were not literal 24 hour periods. They were "ages" (read this article).
Let's compare evolution with creation in Genesis, shall we?
In Genesis,
* there is a "big bang" when everything is spoken into existence... one second it's not there, the next it is.
* on earth, water separates from land, less complex creatures are created, more complex creatures are created, etc etc... finally man is created.
That's pretty much what evolution teaches as well. Where's the conflict?
The link posted where I wrote "read this article" gives a lot of useful information. I'd suggest reading it.
I've read plenty of lengthy articles that combine the days in the first chapter of Genesis with the most popular evolution story. It doesn't work unless you want to believe that:
The earth was around before the sun.
The earth was originally completely covered by water
Birds were around before land animals
Fruit-bearing and flowering plants evolved before any fish and before any land animals evolved. They even evolved before the sun, moon, and stars ever existed (or were viewable through whatever plot device you want to insert to block out the sun).
There may be others, but suffice it to say, Genesis one is not simplified uniformitarianism.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/12/2008 6:26:15 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 393
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
quote:
Thats the same approach they used when they put Galileo under Inquisition for supporting heliocentrism. If you manage to put the literal interpretation of the Bible as the ultimate authority of science, you will literally be sewing the destruction of the USA in no uncertain terms.
I love drama! 
It does seem a bit overstated. PROTECT EVOLUTION OR AMERICA IS DOOOOOOMED!
I wasnt speaking of evolution, I was speaking of Biblical literalism and the anti-intellectualism it promotes as well as the irrational aversion to science it fosters. Fact is, any nation that hopes to succeed in the modern world has to be a leader in science. Biblical literalists want to overturn all of that, and put the bible in its place, even though theres no conflict between the two, to begin with.
Well I appreciate your patriotism and wanting to protect America from the disease of Biblical fidelity. I do not subscribe to anti-intellectualism, nor do I think that believing that the Bible should be read as intended promotes anti-intellectualism. It may promote an aversion to science in some, but only in those who aren't willing or are unable to delve into the sciences to find that evolution does not have the death grip on biology that we are supposed to think that it does. I love science, I love biology, and I find no disagreement between science and the Bible. I find much disagreement between YOUR flavor of data interpretation and the Bible. There is a difference. I don't want to overturn Americas edge on technological superiority, and I fail to see how supporting creation science will cause B-2s and F-22s to suddenly fall out of the sky. Do you think we needed to believe that the earth is old in order to make a nuclear missile? What do you say you stop fooling yourself? We don't need the theory of evolution, it is NOT synonymous with science.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/12/2008 11:43:44 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 306
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
Well I appreciate your patriotism and wanting to protect America from the disease of Biblical fidelity. I do not subscribe to anti-intellectualism,
There's exceptions to every rule.
quote:
nor do I think that believing that the Bible should be read as intended promotes anti-intellectualism. It may promote an aversion to science in some, but only in those who aren't willing or are unable to delve into the sciences to find that evolution does not have the death grip on biology that we are supposed to think that it does.
I'm not even talking about evolution here. I'm talking about the mentality that the majority of literalists have. No amount of evidence, no matter how empirical, irrefutable it is, they will not budge from their literalist interpretation if there is a contradiction between reality and scripture.
At that point you cant call it faith anymore.. it more resembles a mental disorder. Anti-intellectualism and the admiration for ignorance is rampant in the literalist community from what I can see.
quote:
I love science, I love biology, and I find no disagreement between science and the Bible. I find much disagreement between YOUR flavor of data interpretation and the Bible. There is a difference. I don't want to overturn Americas edge on technological superiority, and I fail to see how supporting creation science will cause B-2s and F-22s to suddenly fall out of the sky. Do you think we needed to believe that the earth is old in order to make a nuclear missile? What do you say you stop fooling yourself? We don't need the theory of evolution, it is NOT synonymous with science.
Do you need to think the earth is 6k years old to follow the example of Jesus Christ? I seem to recall Jesus getting pretty bent out of shape over the pharisees who forgot the spirit of the law and were only concerned with the letter. Literalists appear to have fallen into the same trap.
< Message edited by drj11 -- 4/12/2008 11:50:06 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/13/2008 7:12:22 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 393
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: drj11
quote:
I'm not even talking about evolution here. I'm talking about the mentality that the majority of literalists have. No amount of evidence, no matter how empirical, irrefutable it is, they will not budge from their literalist interpretation if there is a contradiction between reality and scripture.
Well we'll let them have their literalism. Thinking people do not believe that the earth is flat, nor do they believe that the earth sits on the back of a turtle. You are correct. If I am to be convinced that there is no upper limit to the age of the earth or that the earth was not created in six days, then I would have to be convinced through scripture and common reason. This is because the Bible is DEMONSTRABLY divine in origin and therefore there can be no contradiction between reality and scripture. There can be contradictions between how we interpret scientific data and scripture, no doubt that happens all the time. But when we reach the top of the mountain of scientific truth, we'll find the Bible was there the whole time. BUT THE BEAUTIFUL THING IS, we don't have to check our intelligence at the door when we compare scripture with science because where scripture touches the scientific realm, the Bible is shown to be reliable.
quote:
At that point you cant call it faith anymore.. it more resembles a mental disorder. Anti-intellectualism and the admiration for ignorance is rampant in the literalist community from what I can see.
Well I hope that you don't see it in this community of thinking skeptics. I could name some anti-intellectuals that subscribe to your world view as well, so I would not say that anti-intellectualism and a denial of evolution is necessarily synonymous. And saying that there is an admiration for ignorance is just bordering on name-calling and really fails to move this conversation along.
quote:
Do you need to think the earth is 6k years old to follow the example of Jesus Christ? I seem to recall Jesus getting pretty bent out of shape over the pharisees who forgot the spirit of the law and were only concerned with the letter. Literalists appear to have fallen into the same trap.
No, we don't need to believe that the earth is 6,000 years old to follow Christ's example, but I do think that the first two chapters of Genesis, when properly divided, show that the earth was created in 6 days completely out of order with my Astronomy text book. I don't think that Jesus is going to get bent out of shape over a discussion about science and hermeneutics.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/13/2008 7:38:29 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 306
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Well we'll let them have their literalism. Thinking people do not believe that the earth is flat, nor do they believe that the earth sits on the back of a turtle. You are correct. If I am to be convinced that there is no upper limit to the age of the earth or that the earth was not created in six days, then I would have to be convinced through scripture and common reason. This is because the Bible is DEMONSTRABLY divine in origin and therefore there can be no contradiction between reality and scripture. There can be contradictions between how we interpret scientific data and scripture, no doubt that happens all the time. But when we reach the top of the mountain of scientific truth, we'll find the Bible was there the whole time. BUT THE BEAUTIFUL THING IS, we don't have to check our intelligence at the door when we compare scripture with science because where scripture touches the scientific realm, the Bible is shown to be reliable.
Can you provide examples of the Bible's scientific accuracy that you are talking about? I really dont think it is scientifically accurate in any kind of sense, nor was it meant to be. I think it is (obviously;)) a huge mistake of epic proportions to treat the Bible as a scientific treatise. Honestly...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/14/2008 9:17:21 AM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 1524
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
quote:
Can you provide examples of the Bible's scientific accuracy that you are talking about? I really dont think it is scientifically accurate in any kind of sense, nor was it meant to be. I think it is (obviously;)) a huge mistake of epic proportions to treat the Bible as a scientific treatise. Honestly...
And YEC's think it is a travesty to be indoctrinated and dominated by something contrary to belief, and, on top of that, it is all based on certain suppositions that are found to be "irrefutable" because there is no obvious reason for it to be wrong. Throw the whole: God can do anything in there. Human reason now is meaningless in a battle against God's word (for YEC's).
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
Isaiah 40:31 But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/14/2008 12:14:36 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 306
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
quote:
Can you provide examples of the Bible's scientific accuracy that you are talking about? I really dont think it is scientifically accurate in any kind of sense, nor was it meant to be. I think it is (obviously;)) a huge mistake of epic proportions to treat the Bible as a scientific treatise. Honestly...
And YEC's think it is a travesty to be indoctrinated and dominated by something contrary to belief, and, on top of that, it is all based on certain suppositions that are found to be "irrefutable" because there is no obvious reason for it to be wrong. Throw the whole: God can do anything in there. Human reason now is meaningless in a battle against God's word (for YEC's).
I would have said it like this:
I think it is a travesty to be indoctrinated and dominated by a belief contrary to reality, and, on top of that, it is all based on certain suppositions that are found to be "irrefutable" because they are in the Bible, even though the majority of Christians think your interpretation is wrong and don't believe it to be scientific.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/14/2008 1:10:19 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 393
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
quote:
Well we'll let them have their literalism. Thinking people do not believe that the earth is flat, nor do they believe that the earth sits on the back of a turtle. You are correct. If I am to be convinced that there is no upper limit to the age of the earth or that the earth was not created in six days, then I would have to be convinced through scripture and common reason. This is because the Bible is DEMONSTRABLY divine in origin and therefore there can be no contradiction between reality and scripture. There can be contradictions between how we interpret scientific data and scripture, no doubt that happens all the time. But when we reach the top of the mountain of scientific truth, we'll find the Bible was there the whole time. BUT THE BEAUTIFUL THING IS, we don't have to check our intelligence at the door when we compare scripture with science because where scripture touches the scientific realm, the Bible is shown to be reliable.
Can you provide examples of the Bible's scientific accuracy that you are talking about? I really dont think it is scientifically accurate in any kind of sense, nor was it meant to be. I think it is (obviously;)) a huge mistake of epic proportions to treat the Bible as a scientific treatise. Honestly...
Yes, "epic proportions". From listening to you, it's almost as if keeping YEC out of the public square is equivalent to stifling an apocalypse. Your question as to where the Bible is scientifically accurate is a backwards question because the Bible is constantly touching on scientific matters. Not just the astronomy, geology, and biology of the first two chapters which we clearly disagree about, but also in the book of Job where God is quizing Job on his creation by asking him questions to which he does not know the answer. There are other places in the Psalms. Do you want examples? Are we going to go through them one at a time? Why don't you just provide me with a place OTHER THAN the first 11 chapters of Genesis that the Bible is scientifically inaccurate by a theory or discovery that has stood the test of time. I'm sure a Google search or talkorigins can provide you with some examples.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Young Earth Creationism, Old Earth Creationism, or ... - 4/14/2008 1:52:16 PM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 1524
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
quote:
I would have said it like this:
I think it is a travesty to be indoctrinated and dominated by a belief contrary to reality, and, on top of that, it is all based on certain suppositions that are found to be "irrefutable" because they are in the Bible, even though the majority of Christians think your interpretation is wrong and don't believe it to be scientific.
So, professor... you think numbers mean accuracy and truth. LOL! Good job. You just professed the Islamic faith. You lose.
That was a horrible way to respond. Much like my above response. There is no truth to the conclusion you made or the one I presented. 
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
Isaiah 40:31 But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
