YEC and The Doctrine of Perspicuity of Scripture

[DaleCutler]

@Jordan

I’m not sure if that’s exactly part of the Doctrine of Perspicuity.

My point is that since scripture is all about Jesus, in reducing Jesus to Plan B, YEC doctrine destroys the perspicuity of scripture.

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

@Jordan

n your view does “proper translation” include an absence of interpretation (like we must have a literal Hebrew/Greek → English translation) and if not how would we know which interpretations are acceptable?

Sure. If it’s an ‘interpretation’ it’s not a translation. We know which interpretations are acceptable by applying sound principles of biblical hermeneutics (historical grammatical) and allowing Scripture to interpret itself through crossreference.

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

@DaleCutler

My point is that since scripture is all about Jesus, in reducing Jesus to Plan B, YEC doctrine destroys the perspicuity of scripture.

1. What you just said seems to indicate that God intended for Adam and Eve to sin against him. Is that correct? It was God’s will for mankind to rebel?

2. What did Peter say the scoffers would deny in 2 Peter 3? Was it only Jesus they would deny?

[DaleCutler]

Why did God create the universe?

[DaleCutler]

Was the Garden perfect? No. Any place that Satsn could enter was not perfect.

How did Adam and Eve know what death was?

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

Why don’t you answer my questions before asking me different ones of your own?

[DaleCutler]

You don’t recognize that the answer to your question is in the answer to my in my question, if you could answer it.

Why did God create the universe?

The Bible gives us more than a clue why.

God’s motivation is really quite understandable, and purpose for our lives is also intimately involved in it: joy for himself in our love for him and our pride in him as our Father, his joy in us and joy for us in reciprocated familial love.

The original unfallen creation was merely “very good”, not perfect:

God’s purpose was and still is to magnify the most valuable thing there is, namely himself (he would be lying if he said otherwise), and to increase and share his joy. He is happy in himself.*

Father’s intended purpose in creating the world was to was not to create a perfect one. His purpose was not thwarted. It was a two creations** model from the get-go, and the first one was subjected to futility on purpose, from its very start.

The original unfallen creation was merely “very good”, not perfect, since it did not and could not magnify God’s justice, mercy, grace and love through our Lord, Jesus, the Christ. Jesus’ motivation is also explicit and clear, and it was forward looking***: “for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame.” Hebrews 12:2. That joy is us(!), if you nave been adopted into his family.

The New Earth will be perfect.

---

*See The Pleasures of God
**“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Matthew 25:34
***Our motivation should be forward looking, too, toward future grace

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

I just want you to simply and straightforwardly answer the questions I asked, directly.

[DaleCutler]

@PDPrice

What did Peter say the scoffers would deny in 2 Peter 3? Was it only Jesus they would deny?

There is major irony in your question about 2 Peter 3.

…the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

The world that then existed does not refer to the entire globe. Does it say globe? Do we not use the word to mean other things than the whole globe? Like ‘the world of politics’?

The irony is this, two verses later:

…with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

[DaleCutler]

You don’t always get what you want. You can’t see the answer to your question in my answer, can you.

[Timothy_Horton]

@PDPrice

I just want you to simply and straightforwardly answer the questions I asked, directly.

We just want you to simply and straightforwardly answer the questions we have asked, directly.

When you start answering questions instead of dodging then you can complain.

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

@DaleCutler

You don’t always get what you want. You can’t see the answer to your question in my answer, can you.

This helps me to confirm exactly what kinds of questions Old-earthers of your variety are uncomfortable with. Thanks for that, at least.

[DaleCutler]

@DaleCutler

You can’t see the answer to your question in my answer, can you.

They make you think. That’s not a bad thing.

[DaleCutler]

The answer to your question is yes, btw, but he is not to blame for it. I am not at all uncomfortable with that.

[DaleCutler]

@PDPrice

Old-earthers of your variety…

Oh dear.