Evangelicals divided over evolution

Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 30 May 2005 | Paul Nussbaum

[malakhi]

I believe it because that is what it SAYS.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, literalists such as yourself think that their interpretation = "what it SAYS". Literalists have difficulty with the concept that every reading of a text is an interpretive act. That the literalness of Genesis 1 has been a matter of debate for at least two millennia should be some indication that the matter is not quite as cut-and-dried as you wish to believe.

[malakhi]

Oh, and you missed addressing this point:

Since Genesis 1 does not record the creation of the sun until the 4th day, that might be some indication that the meaning of "evening", "morning" and "day" in Genesis 1:5 is something other than literal. How can there be a literal 24-hour day without the sun?

[Just mythoughts]

"Absolutely false. The chapter doesn't have anything to do with creationism. It has to do with Christ's return. The whole thing."

AND you think Genesis is not about CHRIST?????? Who was the TREE OF LIFE????? It is the BEGINNING where in all that follows comes from what is initially stated "IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVEN AND EARTH!!!!!!

Then there is an event described that is discussed in other places such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and PETER!!!

"Here is the chapter. My comments in brackets.

2 Peter 3
1This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
{Peter is writing a letter to a specific group of Christians he refers to as "beloved"} "

Check out what we are told in Ecclesiastes by the Preacher to the man under the sun, plainly speaking of flesh man.....

Ecclesiastes 12:9-11 (11) There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after..

Yet here is Peter stirring up a REMEMBRANCE, come now THINK!!!

"2That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: "

Ah yes those "HOLY PROPHETS" this make what is call the OLD one and the same as the NEW!!! What did the prophets have to say and this includes MOSES.

"3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,"

Accurately describes what we do in fact see today.

"4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
{The subject he is speaking of here...not creationism but the return of the Lord. Not the days of creation, but the days until his return.} "

Really, Peter says man is still doing what he has done since the beginning of the creation, used those words beginning and creation to describe what would be going on. So what was going on then that is still going on today???? This sends the reader to go back to what took place to get a glimpse of that remembrance Peter is seeking to STIR up, that is not given as told to us in Ecclesiastes,

"5For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: "


IGNORANT of WHAT, the age of this earth!!!! HELLO!!!!! Oh and John comes to mind when he said who the WORD was and is and will be. Interesting what John's usage of that word WORD.

"6Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: {I do not see how this is not referring to Noah, particularly with the previous verses. Noah was mocked when he said God was going to send punishment. He was scoffed at. 120 years he labored without a single convert. Peter is referring to the time of Noah and when the world that was was destroyed by water} "

Well because it is not talking about Noah, because Peter describes Noah in the previous chapter, here Peter is talking about the AGE of the earth that man is ignorant of and wherein it the earth perished. Check out that word perished and its meaning and all the places it is used.

Now Noah was saved for a specific reason, and Christ says that what was going on in the days of Noe (Noah) would be going on again as a sign of HIS coming. DO YOU KNOW WHAT was going on that cause Noah and his family to be the only from Adam that were saved?????

"7But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. {Again a reference to God's promise to Noah to never destroy the world by water again. Next time, it will be as by fire} "

Ah that specific time noted as NOW, could we call it a dispensation of TIME know as the FLESH age. Note exactly what was said when the Adam was created, he was nothing until the breathe of life = the soul was place in him. Where did that soul come from as we are not told it was created at the time the flesh was formed from the dust.

"8But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. {Not even anywhere near to discussing the 6 days of creation. It is a statement about how time itself is not the issue with God. It may seem long to us [the wait for His return] but in God's economy it is less than a blip on the map}"

This describes what TIME means to the Heavenly Father, break it down one of out days would be like a blink in the eye of the Heavenly Father. The DAY of the Lord is a distinct amount of time. What does it change for each day of creation to have been to us in the flesh a thousand years?

"9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise,{What promise? The promise to return} as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. "

Yes, we are to pray for patience as things are on our Heavenly Father's schedule and not ours. Christ said I have foretold you all things and yet we still continue to learn. Note that word "PERISH" used again, study it learn who it applies to and why it is used over and over and over again and to WHOM specifically it denotes. (Hint son of perdition, the only one named that already has a death sentence.)

"10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. {Again, referring to Jesus's return. Not creationism}"

Creationism???? Actually it is a warning, think about it, what would create the condition to cause man in the flesh to be caught unaware of Christ returning. Maybe because as it is written the whole world except for the very elect would be bowing a knee to Baal. That one who was overthrown in Genesis 1:2.

"11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?"

Check out what exactly this word "elements" means. What kind of fervent heat destroys flesh and souls????

"13Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

14Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;"


Peter is in agreement with Paul and oh my what Paul had to say about predestination. How do the two of the fit, cause they sure have tooo after this glowing account of Paul by Peter.

"16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

17Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. {one error of such is trying to fit billions of years into the first few chapters of Genesis and making the Bible fit the latest "scientific" trends}"


Considering we are not told the number of years ago when Genesis 1:1 and 2 took place and the earth itself if filled with evidence of an OLD along with Peter telling us not to be ignorant of an OLD earth seems you might need to reconsider exactly what you are missing..... Some call them LINKS!!!

18But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.



NOW what difference in the scheme of things does it make or change if the days of creation were a literal 24 hours or as Peter tells us they were a thousand years???? Does it change what the Heavenly Father and those who were with Him in the creation??? Aren't we told that all these things were done as signs, so each thing we are told in Genesis is a sign that is part of the story of one man, the Adam, his generations to Christ and those they came in contact with.

[Blogger]

Eisegesis to the extreme.

[Blogger]

You can have light without the sun. Morning and evening are TIME based events. God created time and then later the sun. In heaven, as Christians, we know there will be no more sun or moon but Jesus Christ will be the light thereof. There are other sources of light than sun. Yet, the plants need sun to survive, hence the literal day.

[Blogger]

NOW what difference in the scheme of things does it make or change if the days of creation were a literal 24 hours or as Peter tells us they were a thousand years???? Does it change what the Heavenly Father and those who were with Him in the creation??? Aren't we told that all these things were done as signs, so each thing we are told in Genesis is a sign that is part of the story of one man, the Adam, his generations to Christ and those they came in contact with.
PETER IS NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BLOOMING AGE OF THE EARTH!!!!! Good grief! He's talking about the return of Christ and the judgment that will come upon the earth. People are ignoring it. They are WILLFULLY IGNORANT of the signs we are seeing. They scoff at it. They scoff also at a literal interpretation of the Bible. Let me ask you, why do you believe that the earth is billions of years old?

[Just mythoughts]

"PETER IS NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BLOOMING AGE OF THE EARTH!!!!! Good grief! He's talking about the return of Christ and the judgment that will come upon the earth. People are ignoring it. They are WILLFULLY IGNORANT of the signs we are seeing. They scoff at it. They scoff also at a literal interpretation of the Bible. Let me ask you, why do you believe that the earth is billions of years old?"


Peter clearly says that IIPeter 3:5

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, (this is group number one who believes in a 6,000 year old earth) and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: (this is to those who think that this is about Noah's flood).

You are partially correct about this being about Christ's return, it is specifically telling us what we are not to be ignorant of and what people would be doing prior to the return of Christ. Part of not being caught unaware of the return of Christ is the requirement to NOT be ignorant of this earth being of OLD.

The word is fertile and if you don't get it then so be it, as Peter says he is stirring up the remembrance and that would come from He who removed the remembrance in the first place.

Here are a few items that are pre-man in the flesh.

Ezekiel 28 describing Satan

Jeremiah 4:22-31

Revelations 12:4

Jacob and Esau in the womb already having a history.

Job 38 through the rest of the book

Jude

This would be for starters.


When did Satan get the death sentence?????

When did Satan rebel???

When were the souls created, they sure were not described as being newly created in Genesis?

Who was with the Heavenly Father when He said "Let US make man in OUR image.

This will do for starters.

[Blogger]

He is talking about the Lord's return. No further discussion on that one. We will just disagree.

Answer my question. WHY do you believe that the earth is billions of years old?

[Blogger]

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, (this is group number one who believes in a 6,000 year old earth) and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: (this is to those who think that this is about Noah's flood).

It says OF old, not that they were Old. The point here is that the heavens were by the Word of God, not that they are old. The willful ignorance, if you want to apply this to creationism, is that people are willfully ignorant in claiming anything other than that God spoke the worlds into being (as opposed to evolving by chance random processes). You are partially correct about this being about Christ's return, it is specifically telling us what we are not to be ignorant of and what people would be doing prior to the return of Christ. Part of not being caught unaware of the return of Christ is the requirement to NOT be ignorant of this earth being of OLD. (BALONEY!)

[Blogger]

OF OLD
pavlai probably another form for (3825) (through the idea of retrocession)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Palai 5:717,769
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
pal'-ahee Adverb

Definition
of old, former
long ago


In other words, this they are willfully ignorant of "Long ago, God spoke the heavens into being."

No conflict with 6,000-10,000 years here. That is long ago.

Now, answer my question - why do believe it is billions of years?

[Just mythoughts]

"former" former what? earth age that WAS???? Peter's words. Note in Genesis 1:28 the instruction was given to REPLINISH the earth, and subdue it. That word means what it means and to replenish something means there was something there before, yet we are not given dates.

There is nothing recorded in flesh man's history of the past 6,000 to 10,000 years that explains Satan's rebellion, yet we are told it happened.

Furthermore the dinos were not wiped out in the past 6-10 thousand years.

Now you keep using this word billion, and if you check carefully I never used this word billions let alone the word billion. We are not told when Genesis 1:1 was or when Genesis 1:2 happened, just that it did. We are only given things that occurred during that time frame in other places.

Something happened upon this earth at least millions of years ago before man was ever formed out of the dust and that breathe of life placed = soul was placed in that flesh body.


Peter said what he did for a reason and some of us are free to choose what to believe and what to ignore.

[malakhi]

You can have light without the sun. Morning and evening are TIME based events.

How can you have evening and morning and days without the sun? You can't. "Day", "evening" and "morning" are defined by the position and movement of the Earth vís-a-vís the sun. There can be no literal "day", "evening" or "morning" without the sun. You are rationalizing to try to preserve your literalist interpretation. "Eisegesis to the extreme" indeed.

[Blogger]

Replenish is a bad King James translation, and you know that. Sorry. The word also means fill and given that Adam was the first man, it is the translation that makes the most sense.

Why do you believe the Millions of years then?

[Blogger]

No, you are trying to rationalize to make the Bible fit the pseudo-scientific hypothesis.

[Blogger]

Day is defined by a period of time (24 hours). Morning and evening are defined by the revolution of the earth (with or without the sun and moon).

[malakhi]

No, you are trying to rationalize to make the Bible fit the pseudo-scientific hypothesis.

Oh, sure. It is perfectly natural to understand it to mean that days, mornings and evenings can exist in the absence of the sun. What could be more common-sensical? </sarcasm>

[malakhi]

Morning and evening are defined by the revolution of the earth

No. Leaving aside the fact that "revolution" refers to the movement of the earth around the sun, and thus pertains to 'years' rather than 'days', "morning" is defined as the period of time when the apparent position of the sun is in the eastern portion of the sky. "Evening" is defined as the period of time when the apparent position of the sun is in the far western portion of the sky, or after the sun has set over the western horizon.

Day is defined by a period of time (24 hours).

In the absence of the sun, moon, and stars (the fourth day), or even a 'firmament' (the second day), there is no frame of reference against which the rotation of the earth can be measured.

Those are the sort of absurdities you must swallow whole if you insist upon a literalist reading of Genesis 1.

[Blogger]

God defines time. There is no "apparent" with Him. With God, the inspirer of the text Morning and Evening have REAL meaning not dependent upon the existence of the Sun and Moon.

The problem is with even theistic evolutionists insisting that somehow morning and evening fit into a framework of millions or billions of years. Day, morning, and evening are not consistent terms with that concept.

[Blogger]

Days are based on time. Hours. Not the sun.

Morning and evening can be as well. It is morning time. or Night time. They don't mean millions of years. That is nonsensical.

[malakhi]

With God, the inspirer of the text Morning and Evening have REAL meaning not dependent upon the existence of the Sun and Moon.

You'll apparently entertain whatever manner of logical absurdities you need in order to maintain your literalist interpretation.

The problem is with even theistic evolutionists insisting that somehow morning and evening fit into a framework of millions or billions of years. Day, morning, and evening are not consistent terms with that concept.

Do you understand the concept of figurative language? The whole point is that a figurative interpretation doesn't read those terms literally.