Posted on 01/02/2014 5:29:26 PM PST by Zeneta
Morris, of course, has recently passed away.
I’m not familiar with his views on the flood, young vs. old earth so to speak.
I do however, think that it is of critical importance.
Hugh Ross, in my opinion, simply gives people a “social excuse” for the “Christian”.
Yeah, I was more thinking about the interest of the mission rather than our political interests as Christians. Obviously apatheists are very unlikely to be militant and therefore unlikely to threaten our liberties, but the point is that when trying to win people over to the faith, it does seem to be easier with people who care deeply about finding truth, rather than someone who simply doesn’t care. What reason does he have to listen to you?
I pray God intervenes in such lives to open their hearts.
I beg your pardon on that last line, replete with scare quotes? Can you elucidate what the “excuse” is? He believes in full miracle creations. He also believes in observational science, and Romans 1:20 offers an excellent reason not to just wave it away lightly. I think he has wrestled with the day-age theory about as well as it can be wrestled with. I do not think he has considered conjoined universes, though in a presentation he gave which I attended, he came tantalizingly near affirming the reality that would be needed to support that. We see three dimensions and time in our mortal coil. Who says God has nothing more to weave reality from? I sure don’t.
Bflr
This seems to rhyme with how Christ elsewhere says he’d rather see a church be either hot or cold than lukewarm (though we are talking about nonbelievers here). People who passionately care about something, can be addressed. Their passion may be deftly deflected from what’s wrong to what’s right, when holiness is introduced into the picture. People who don’t care offer nothing for an evangelist to work with.
By the way I would strongly warn you against putting scare quotes around ‘Christian’ in any context where we are talking about theological debate. Because theology does not make Christ come near. Christ (the person) comes near, then He begins teaching theology. The scare-quote mindset is, IMHO, pride or self idolatry.
When did “observational science” really start?
500 BC ? give or take ?
I certainly believe in and trust observational science. It has rules and protocols.
Historical science is open to interpretation and the rules of modern science, established by Popper, can’t, by definition, apply.
Recommended reading: "Darwin's Ghost" by Steve Jones.
It's a modern update of Darwin's "Origin" book, with recent facts supporting Darwin's theory on evolution.
Jones' book also ends with the same words that Darwin used.
Those words are...
There is grandeur in this view of life, with it's several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one: and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.
Jones tells us (in four chapters covering geological matters) that - for example - the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and the top of Mount Everest used to be a sea bed. Both statements have factual evidence. Think about it.
[Because theology does not make Christ come near.]
Well, I will back off of that. A little. Just enough to allow that one must be willing to allow that God exists and that He rewards those who seek Him. That’s the only view one needs into God to receive the promise. Believe He has extended it, and accept it. Everything else truly is gravy. Talking about quote-Christian-unquote is, to me, an exercise in vanity and guaranteed to stir up denominational and inter-school fights that get the devil happy and God sad. Talk about weak and strong Christians if you must, but never about quote-Christians-unquote. Because if we do, we may find ourselves on the wrong end of that scare someday. (As you judge, you shall be judged.)
Cosmically, it’s at least as old as calendars and astrology, because calendar makers and astrologers had to have something to follow. Terrestrially, it’s as old as any kind of technology, even the flint age, because observations of the properties of materials were required. It all follows from the ancient biblical imperative to subdue the earth, to harness it to good uses. One can argue about the validity of any spiritual basis of astrology (actually, it might well have a divine spiritual basis, which has since become demonically misused), but at least it offered a reason to follow the stars beyond calendar-keeping.
That is a shallow non-argument. If I said, “I despise Obama, and all it will take you to understand why is simply think of the presidents whom YOU disrespect, and imagine just one more”, you would scratch your head. The “gods” we dismiss are not gods at all, but human constructs.
Only Christ rose from the dead to save humanity from its sins, and left behind overwhelming evidence that it really happened, including His Holy Shroud and numerous witnesses who were martyred for their insistence that Christ is God. Bob
Thank you for your reply.
Sincerely.
It was not my intention to get into a young earth/old earth debate.
Not today.
My intention however, runs completely counter to your statement that “Beliefs belong in a Church”.
The foundations of belief among even thoughtful atheists are found both expressed and otherwise in virtually every aspect of our lives.
Those foundations must be challenged. Both sides have run out of arguments and things are coming to a head.
The arguments are being boiled down to embracing uncertainty or the God of the Creation. There is however an out for some folks if adopt an Ancient Alien theory that has become popularized recently.
Hugh Ross is a very good man who has led many to the Lord. You don’t have to agree with him on every point. Bob
Duh? What are you getting at here?
Beliefs would belong, at least, everywhere that something they apply to exists. If God is omnipresent, well... (same about heads, are they only in books? what about out there looking around?)
Of course “church” (worship and faith education) is a good place to share such beliefs. Not the only place, though.
As I’ve pointed out, flood geology isn’t the only way to harmonize the “secular” sciences with theology. And so what if in our mortal coil Mt. Everest was underseas. God has more stuff to weave reality from than what we think we see here.
And in the home.
And in the streets.
And at work.
And...
I meant no disrespect with my use of scare quotes.
It was simply my intention to emphasize the term in my sentence. I could have bolded or capped it, boxed it in parentheses or put commas around it.
It seems though all of those choices would have resulted in the same.
I write how I speak and without body language, volume or enunciation expressions and meaning can be lost.
“Atheists don’t believe in God. But the Devil does’’.— Bishop Fulton J.Sheen.
On a side note.
I would love to put together an Apologetics conference in a large auditorium.
An space that had one of those massive room dividers inside.
Without telling the participants ahead of time, I would have two different entrances with signs the read “Young Earth enter here”, “Old Earth enter here”.
Once they were all seated I would open the divider and begin the discussion reading from Genesis.
“In the beginning.......
You meant to belittle their status as Christians in any style.
Sorry, but Christianity is a quantum thing. You is or you ain’t. To half-pedal that is to diss Christ Himself, who said quite plainly that no one shall snatch them out of His hand. If we begged the devil himself to do that... it would be impossible. (I laugh at those who say “we could creep out.” By what power? Supposed “self” power of fallenness really is devil power.)
More to the point, probably would be “Without Him, nothing was made that was made.” Give Christ His full due acclaim and credit. (It matters! The more Christ gets acclaim in a congregation, generally the more spiritual power that congregation will have. Baptists are often VERY good at this but are hardly alone in frequently having outstanding congregations.)
THEN, we can validly discuss HOW it happened and WHAT the effects were, looking for an answer that harmonizes with all known information. And not even young-earth and old-earth are neat camps of unanimity, and there are middle-age-earthers too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.