If a strawman had a red herring in his shirt pocket, it would look like this.
Hellbent or heaven-sent? That’s the question. The truth does not mean agreeing with your minority perspective on the meaning and intent of scripture. The truth is its own construct. It is to be discovered. When you insist your position from scripture, you are not doing so faithfully to scripture. You are doing so faithfully to your own interpretation of scripture, against solid evidence that comes from the creation authored by God Himself.
How in the world would you feel if people began calling out your Christian faith. If they were to say that YEC is a cult, with a new Gospel message and scriptures that can only be interpreted by cult leaders like you? You have crossed a line here in saying what you have said.
The purpose in continuing the dialog is so that other people can read your words and the words of others here and determine for themselves the truth. You are correct in saying that it is not worth the time to engage here, because you fail to admit where you are wrong. You fail to admit when you use fallacy-laden logic to “prove” a point, and you fail to admit that most Christians disagree with the position you hold about the age of the earth, the way that God created life on this planet, and how people should engage on this subject.
The God who swears by His own name has fashioned a creation that has fossils and radioactivity and genomic sequences. When we study them carefully, we can infer a history with a high degree of confidence. It’s fundamentally the same process a forensic scientist uses with DNA and fingerprint evidence to piece together a historical account.
We don’t need nonsense about the half-lives of radioactive nuclides or the speed of light spontaneously changing to fit a poor interpretation of scripture.
The only thing I can “attribute to a mainstream semi” was the mangling of the front of my car a few years ago when the driver cut his turn too tight. But the process was adequately described by Newton’s Laws of Motion.
I’ve often stated that no evolutionary process has “ever run contrary to early Genesis.” The evolutionary processes which God created are in no way in conflict with the early chapters of Genesis. God’s revelations in his creation don’t contradict his revelations in his scriptures. Greg, only you are insisting that God contradicts himself in such ways. Do you have a small concept of the creator?
Yes, because I believe God is that kind of very powerful and wise creator.
Yes you do. And that’s because you prefer man-made traditions to what God has actually revealed in his creation and in his scriptures.
Yes. That is finally something we can both agree on.
No I am not. You are either confused about the difference between philosophical materialism and the methodological materialism of science (despite our explaining it to you countless times) or you are simply making stuff up which misrepresents my position.
I’m consider my position a theistic creationism as well. It fits the historical definition.
Rubbish. Not so very long ago science finally revealed that God had designed microscopic eggs and sperm (which no human eye could see on his/her own) in order to produce humans like you and me. That’s one of many many examples which shoot down your claim.
I’m entirely agreeable to the Biblical text. You are simply furious that I refuse to agree with your personal opinions about what you want the Biblical text to say and mean.
That one is easy: I disagree with you because I have spent years studying God’s word and God’s creation, and I’ve seen and accepted God’s revelations in both. I rank what God reveals far above what your favorite man-made traditions claim.
I come from a Young Earth Creationist church background. I held Morris-Whitcomb-Gish traditions about “creation science” for many years. The evidence from God’s word and God’s creation eventually brought me out of that mindset.
Rubbish. The apostles wrote absolutely nothing to endorse modern-day Young Earth Creationism. You are invoking the name of Jesus and are appealing to the apostles to support your personal opinions because you are totally unable to present any scripture evidence or creation evidence to explain to us why a “true Christian” must agree with you.
I assert that your position (in denying God’s revelations) comes with tremendous danger. You are defiant.
That is probably because you have built such an impenetrable wall around your own personal opinions such that no amount of evidence from the scriptures or God’s creation will ever sway you. You are absolutely confused as to why so many Christ-followers around the world disagree with your claims.
I don’t agree with any “atheistic models.”
Or do you think that Newton’s Universal Law of Gravity is an “atheistic model”? Is Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity an “atheistic model”? Do you think the Scientific Method is an “atheistic model”?
I call myself a theist because I affirm the existence of YHWH as described in the Bible.
No. You are simply making things up.
There is no “us” that I know of. You appear to be the only one in this thread who is so very confused about “atheistic models” in science and the fact that millions and millions of Christians see no contradiction.
I consider it worth my time because even though you will probably not benefit from my words, my explanations will be helpful to the many silent readers of these forum threads who never or only rarely post here.
But the God of the Christian faith does not indwell nature. He is outside of nature. So when the Bible states that God created animals according to their kinds, to suggest that He did so while giving chance, selection energy, and time the reigns is to demand that He also indwelt those things in nature because He is the one taking responsibility for creating according to kinds. This is more eastern mysticism and less Judeo Christian stance. Believe what you want but dont say it is honoring to Christ because it just plain is not. If your goal is to unite the eastern religions with Christianity, then go ahead and try, but you will not succeed.
You are already familiar with our disagreeableness on the most important tenant of all of Scripture. We have talked on this on several occassions. Years studying Scripture matters not. Humbling oneself to long for understanding Scripture about God who looks not to people as His most valuable, but rather looks to himself…otherwise God would be an idolater. The gospel is all about God absorbing the wrath that we deserve so that man has no room to boast. The first thing to look for when looking for religious cults is wether they water down the cross to be displaced by the efforts of man. Would you be willing to address your view of salvation? If you died and stood before God today and He asked you,“What have you to bring with you that gives you the right to enter my kingdom”, how would you reply?
He would reply the same as you and I, namely faith in the sacrifice of our Lord, Jesus, the Christ. You really should lose your prideful virtue signaling.
Fossils – gradualism spotty at best, if at all. Punctuated equilibrium highly debated, some viewing it as admission that fossil record does not support Darwinian gradualism.
Radioactivity – old planet does not equate to evolution. Even if life is old, evolution not necessary.
Genomic sequences – no macroevolution demonstrated. Gradualism lacking. Premature parallels drawn, inferences overweening. Conclusions forced from overreach of evidence.
In sum: gradual evolution of life not adequately demonstrated. Idea not elegant. Easily rejected in favor of design and sudden creation by God.
Let @AllenWitmerMiller answer. And can you share with us the church that you attend that best exemplifies the theology about salvation which you, @AllenWitmerMiller would agree with? And how is this question virtue signaling when the point is that salvation is not by any man virtue, but by the virtue of Christ? The act of agreeing to the knowledge about the cross might be considered virtuous to some but it is not enough. Surrendering to the very God who created the universe who loved the world so much, that He sent His Son offers breathtaking joy unto eternal salvation for any who might choose!
Trusting mans science over revelation or Gods word for the truth of our existence would follow a pattern of a theology camp where trusting man more and trusting The Word, Christ Jesus less would also be the standard. Have you yourself recognized this pattern play out over the years @DaleCutler?
All good science is God’s science, no matter who performs it. How else could God hold unbelievers responsible for the testimony of the universe?! You are turning God’s testimony through creation into a lie.
First, science about past events engages a lot of speculation or perhaps we call it faith. One cannot repeat what occurred and if God exists outside the natural, then His decisions and acts in the past are most likely completely unknowable via science. The simplest example is the wine Jesus instantly made from water. Wine is aged and science would be utterly incapable of determining w accuracy the history of the wine Jesus created. Our creation is a far more outstanding miracle! And you say good science trumps Gods manual on how things were accompliished?
I expect to be blown away in heaven when i meet our Creator and learn how little we understand about things on earth today. What a,good day that will be! If i make it for the average, i have only 30 short years. Its like a reverse countdown towards my birthday into glory! The rigors of life on earth are much easier, too, to withstand knowing that our best life is to come.
Please, let us know what the most important tenet (not tenant, which is a renter) of all Scripture is.
What?? This is crazy word salad. It makes no sense whatsoever. God doesn’t worship man, which would make him an idolator. God favors man as his “very good” creation.
I imagine that will happen for all of us. Indeed, every knee will bow. That said, there will also be questions as to why, when God clearly provided much of this information prior to your arrival in Heaven, did you fail to recognize it, neglect to share it, and, moreover, confuse others with your rigid application of scripture? Instead of waiting for then, look to now.
Come on Michael. Christian faith does not come from scientific inquiry. Where do you get this? Medical science alone is very fickle and you suggest that we place more hope in HISTORICAL science and the expense of what is told to us by Gods prophets?
Faith does not come from a walk in the woods, watching a sunset, viewing through a microscope, or telescope etc etc. It comes from hearing and hearing what we ask? Hearing from the prophets God sent called the Bible.
The Bible says knowledge puffs up and love builds up. The Bible also says that love delights in truth and that God is love. This discourse should never be an excercise of whose information is better for information sake. It should be an encouragement to know God through His Son as well as via Gods descriptions about Himself and His works. The heavens do declare the glory and power and transcendence of God, and his Word supplies details that the heavens cannot reveal.
You have demonstrated your ability to list the objections you have read about on YEC sites. Well done!
Anyone can dream up counter-arguments that do not address the body of evidence. Anyone can cherry-pick a half-sentence from the ideas of theorists. So far, that’s what you have done. You have not engaged with any specific research papers or lines of evidence.
How much training and experience do you have in natural science? To me, it seems so far like you do not understand very well what it is that you are criticizing, which in turn leads me to not trust your critique. However, I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.
I never said this. You have put words in my mouth. You said:
I responded that you will be blown away when you learn how much of what The Creator had already shown you through his general revelation that you missed or ignored.
I agree with you completely. But you are missing many opportunities to encourage because of stumbling blocks you unnecessarily install.
I expect to hear from God in heaven about His accomplishment of creation exactly matching the quite simple, straight forward rendering in Genesis. This means we were created directly not products of evolution from apes. This means that animal and plants kinds were created, again not products of evolution as mainstream thinks. But i believe that we will also learn potentially about how our dating methods may be off or how God exists within dimensions we have never considered in science today. God is not a deceiver but He is also not completely understood this side of heaven and heaven forbid we place Him in a box like we have Him and His ways understood via mans science.
