Featured Pat Robertson Calls creationist "Ignorant!"

Well let me say, I have a VERY shallow understanding of quantum physics and mathematics. I only know enough to be dangerous. I do know, much controversy within the world of physics accompanied this 'new idea", but it has withstood the the tests of time and mathematical predictability.

You are so correct, the intent of scripture in the creation narrative was absolutely NOT to teach such concepts, it was rather, (IMO) to instruct, relative to other creation narratives, that the ONE responsible for the cosmos, was in fact the one and only true God, YHWH.

 

My intent, obviously poorly communicated, is that I do not think that the creation narrative has the intent of an instruction or science manual, but rather to communicate the theological truth, that all we see and experience in the cosmos, the heavens, the earth, life and humanity are the result of the creative acts of YHWH.

 

Listen, if you "all" will feel "better" I will be happy to renounce my BB membership and depart. Then you will not have to exposed to positions, thoughts, ideas etc. that I share.

Please feel free to PM and let me know.

 

Don't be silly :smilewinkgrin:

If I can deal with Augustinianism and hyper Calvinism, OE is a trivial matter.

 

Amen! :thumbs:

 

Perhaps God's chastening of Job will be helpful to the doubters!

Job 38:1-4;
1. Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2. Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3. Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding

31. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32. Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33. Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

 

A great big amen to this!!!
and post 85

 

I wonder if there was any, "time," that pasted with the earth being without form and void and darkness upon the face of the deep, before the Spirit moved and God said let there be light?

And God saw the light,
that [it was] good: and God
divided the light from the
darkness.
4
and·he-is-seeing Elohim » the·light that good and·he-is- separating Elohim
between the·light and·between the·darkness ----from Scripture4all.org Hebrew interlinear

It appears the light was good. Was the darkness good also?

Job 30:26 When I looked for good, then evil came unto me: and when I waited for light, there came darkness.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

 

And he would be wrong.

 

If there was death prior to the fall, when did suffering and fear come into the picture. It appears fear entered through the fall from the Garden account.

 

annsi, I am old earth creationist exactly because I am not a doubter of God's word. He has told us that a day isn't always exactly 24 hours with Him. I believe Him.

I would say among the scripturally accurate possibilities:

1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.

2. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says, only the days could be "specific periods of time but not 24 hour days."

3. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says and with 24 hour days, just much further in the past than young earther's hold. This is sort of my default position, although the 24 hour part is negotiable since I seriously doubt God needed 24 hour periods and He dwells outside our time.

4. Gap theory--this is my second default position. It allows a very literal reading of Genesis, and young earth for the current creation. It also allows a literal reading of scriptures which seem to point to there having been some other creation that fell into chaos. Perhaps when Satan fell and 1/3 of the angels?

5. More and more we realize time as we experience it on earth is not necessarily space time. Since God existed before the universe, Genesis may explain things quite literally by earth time and yet not by God's time or universe time.

So I am not a doubter of God's word. I doubt some theories and some interpretations, but not His word. Of paramount importance to me is the fact that God created everything. I can dwell in peace with those that understand the how and the when differently than I do, as long as they base their beliefs on the Bible. Where I would break fellowship is if they don't believe God created all.

 

A day being like a thousand years to God is just that...to God. The Bible was written to man who understood what a day consisted of thousands of years ago and today. Also the appearance of age issue. It is not deceptive to create a tree fully formed, and animals and humans as adults. Its a miracle and supernatural.

 

So do you believe Him when He tells Moses to use the Hebrew language in writing Genesis 1 that demands a literal interpretation of six standard 24-hour days? Because that's what He did, which puts your conclusion in contradiction to God.

Good reason to reject it.

What other kind of days are there that could possibly conform to the rules of translating the Hebrew?

Except that He would want to provide an example for man's work during daylight hours, which from the account are the only hours He worked.

Except that it requires the translation of white space between vv. 1, 2 or Genesis 1 as an entire second creation, which the rest of the Bible inexplicably ignores completely. Don't you find that strange? I don't think silence can be translated at all, much less in that way.

Please tell me where you find that in Scripture. Perhaps those passages are missing from my Bible.

Entirely possible, except that to explain the existence of Earth, one needs to operate in four-dimensional space.

I'm not sure "liberal interpretation of Scripture," which is what you describe herein, can escape the label of "doubter," but I'll give you the benefit of the ... uh ... um ... er ... "doubt"? :laugh:

 

1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.

Human science may indeed be deceived about the age of the Earth (that's what I think is the case) but that doesn't make God a deceiver. Rather, I believe that sinful man with his limited knowledge has interpreted and extrapolated the evidence incorrectly in theorizing a big bang +/-14 billion years ago.