Posted on 02/06/2014 8:33:34 AM PST by PapaNew
Creationist Ken Ham is having his 15 minutes, following a live debate on evolution held between himself and Bill Nye “The Science Guy” on Tuesday.
And while you’d expect most folks to deem Nye the winner (which they have), Ham is receiving criticism from a source you might not expect: televangelist Pat Robertson.
On the Wednesday edition of his TV show, “The 700 Club,” Robertson indirectly implored Ham to put a sock in it, criticizing Ham’s view that the Earth is only 6,000 years old.
“Let’s face it, there was a bishop [James Ussher] … who added up the dates listed in Genesis and he came up with the world had been around for 6,000 years,” Robertson began. “There ain’t no way that’s possible … To say that it all came about in 6,000 years is just nonsense and I think it’s time we come off of that stuff and say this isn’t possible.”
“We’ve got to be realistic that the dating of Bishop Ussher just doesn’t comport with anything that’s found in science,” Robertson continued, “and you can’t just totally deny the geological formations that are out there.”
“Let’s be real,” Robertson begged, “let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
I cannot agree with you on OEC as there are too many changes in the meaning of day (yom). You interpret Creation differently than I. I am not prepared to debate it, however, at least not in a public forum. From what I know of the Bible, this does not affect Salvation, so debating it is not productive, especially in regards to evangelising. To the non-Believer, we are most certainly not ‘set apart’ when we are debating.
The Holy Spirit showed me that by spending time debating such non-essentials as OEC versus YEC, we waste our time instead of spending it worshiping our Creator or evangelising. If we are not reflecting Jesus, how can we be a light in this dark world? The Adversary has already led me to waste too much of my time in this useless debate. When we meet Him face to face, we can find out, though at that time, I doubt that we will really care if it was a YE or an OE.
May the Lord give you the words to share with others that will reflect His light!
I am both OEC and YEC (the affect of reading Genesis with an eye on relativity) as I believe both betty boop and TXnMA are. If anyone struggling with either doctrine would like to know how that is possible, we would be glad to explain it from our individual perspectives: theology, philosophy, science or math.
Indeed, TXnMA's graphics project will make it very clear to many who have a desire to know but little time or background in the disciplines involved.
But, as you say, the doctrines do not affect our salvation unless a distaste for either YEC or OEC keeps a potential or hatchling Christian from from being open to hearing the words of God.
Mature Christians already believe that God was enfleshed in the body of a virgin, made wine into water, healed the sick, made the blind see, raised the dead, walked on water, died for our sins, was crucified, resurrected, is seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven and will come again. We believe all of this, so why would we doubt Scripture on Creation, Noah Flood, age of the Patriarchs, Jonah and the Whale, etc.?
To God be the glory, not man, never man.
There are far-reaching consequences to rejecting the inspiration of scripture. That is why we are in danger of injuring huge numbers of people when we refuse to listen to any reasonable explanation of difficult passages.
If we have our own interpretation, but we know it has weaknesses, then what does it hurt to inspect other ideas? If they don’t fit, then it’s too easy to just set them aside.
That’s one reason people should listen to your OEC/YEC model. If you are on a solid track — and I think you are — then rejecting out of hand something one has not yet seen has the potential to harm people.
We want them saved.
Thank you so very much for your insights and encouragements!
If being a "good" yourself and doing was sufficient, then why did Jesus have to die for us?
If being a “good” yourself and doing was sufficient, then why did Jesus have to die for us?
I hate to tell you this.. BUT......
JESUS IS NOT DEAD...
And not only that but his name is not Jesus...
Hebrew doesn’t even have a “J”...
sounds like you’ve been brain washed... AND
I was NOT talking about being a “good” yourself...
I was talking about being a “Good Yourself”...
It has nothing at all to do with “SIN”...
It’s bout honesty.. civility.. and grace...
Yes, you are right, Jesus is alive. But that’s becasue he was resurrected from the dead. So the question still remains: Why did he die for us if being a “Good Yourself” with “honesty.. civility.. and grace...” were sufficient?
Why did he die for us if being a “Good Yourself” with “honesty.. civility.. and grace...” were sufficient?
WHY?.... to make “you” rethink DEATH.... and consider that maybe everyone lives forever “somewhere”.. and nobody actually “DIES”... And in reconsidering Death you may also reconsider “Life”...
Many think “death” allows one to escape punishment for crimes done while on this planet..
What IF..... that is NOT so...
For life after death to happen SOMEONE must prove it is possible..
Did Jesus do just that?...
To wit: Judeo-Christian religion... and a range of other possibilities..
Jesus was in fact the King of Drama... “a Drama King”..
Maybe STILL IS... Your final act is not yet complete..
Your final drama AWAITS!...
OK, well I pray for His peace and grace to be on you and in you.
OK, well I pray for His peace and grace to be on you and in you.
That’s very.. honest.. civil.. and graceful...
Backatcha..
I think that's fair to say, dearest sister in Christ!
Someone might ask: How is it possible to be both an Old Earth Creationist and and Young Earth Creationist at the same time?
Trial answer: The apparent contradiction is resolved entirely using "relativistic time." Gerald Schroeder has shown us how that can be done.
There is a vast disparity between "God's time," which is unimaginable (by us) as timelessness, or Eternity; and "human time," which is an "artifact of temporal measure," as conditioned by human observation and experience, which therefore can only deal with conditions of finitude.
It seems to me the Holy Scriptures deal with us humans from the standpoint of God's time. So maybe that's why God also gave us "the Book of Nature," for "cross-reference purposes."
The totally amazing thing to me is that, so far in my investigations, I have found no disparity whatsoever between what God Says to man in the Holy Bible, and what modern physical scientists are discovering about the origin and order of the Universe. If anything, the very reverse is true.
Which is interesting; because "science popularizers" such as Richard Dawkins assert that "Darwinian biology" is "teaching us" that, not only is there no God, but that no God is needed, to explain "biology" or anything else in the natural world, including ourselves.
But of course, he has absolutely no way of demonstrating that, let alone "proving" it.
What I worry about is that Christians might read the Holy Scriptures as if they reduced to purely denotative language. The sort of language that one encounters in, say, an instruction manual, or a cookbook.
Somehow, I don't believe that that is what God is "doing" in the Holy Bible. Rather, I see the Holy Scriptures as an invitation to man to "walk with God" in order to see, by His Light and Grace as He permits, the Truth of the Creation He made in the Beginning; the Truth about the human soul and its destiny; the Truth that draws man into relation with Himself and his own close neighbors.
If my understanding is correct, then biblical statements cannot be evaluated as if they were "true/false" propositions. They are all about the "spiritual drawing" of the individual soul, the imago Dei, to his first and final Cause. And in this process, further reveal man's obligations, not only to God his Creator, but to man's relations with his fellow humankind (society) and the physical world itself of which man is somehow a "privileged" part and participant.
In short, if anything, late advances in science itself are making geniuses out of Christians who have placed their Faith and Reason in the God Who declared Himself in the Holy Bible, in the Beginning, unto the End — as borne out in study of the "Book of Nature."
Thank you ever so much, my dearest sister in Christ, for your splendid essay/post!
May His blessings always be with you and all your dear ones!
And: HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!
p.s.: I hope TXnMA will weigh in soon with his amazing "graphics project," of which you and I both have had an early "sneek peek," and clear up all doubt about the reconcilability of the disparity between "what God sees" from the immortal, divine point of view, and what humans see from the point of view of mortal creatures.
Time is a volume. From the moment of creation, not a moment has been lost. Some of time is congealed in matter, some is strung out as past (linear) and some is spread across the Universe as the whole volume is expanding. We exist on this planet oriented to sensing past events at various linear past extensions to our present. Our mind of reason is set in ‘the present’. We have before us the volume unflding. Could it be that when the body tied to the linear expression fo time no longer binds our soul that we will ‘sense’ in scalar framework? LOL, it’s to laugh. we have such a primitive comprehension of dimension Time, yet we are beings with present and past integrated into our make-up staggering into the volume as it unfolds. Our body is governed by fighting entropy while our soul grows in fits and starts.
If Pat Robertson thinks you’re a moron, that’s some rarefied air for sure.
To God be the glory, not man, never man.
That has been my experience also!
Me too. :)
That has been my experience also!
Me 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.