Who Is Intolerant Because Ashamed: Creationists Or Evolutionary Theists?

PatriotandLiberty blog ^ | Feb. 1, 2023 | Linda Kimball

[spirited irish]

“The intimidation to remain silent is insidious and growing…what American Christians are facing is the 21st century version of the question, ‘Am I ashamed of the Gospel?”

If anything, some heterodox evolutionary theologians and their gullible Christian flocks, both evolutionary theist and progressive creationist, are at least as hostile if not more so toward orthodox defenders of the Genesis origin account than are their evolutionary atheist and occult pantheist counterparts: Luciferians, god-men, goddesses, shaman, Satanists, witches, necromancers, and astrologers.

[Qwapisking]

And ALL this was predicted long long ago. In a book of all things. Now if no one could read comprehensively, one side wins.

[spirited irish]

Amen!

[Migraine]

Another masterpiece by the tack-sharp Linda Kimball.

Neither “Science” nor “Reason” can approach God. And “ghosting” God, ignoring Him, writing Him out of existence, psychoanalyzing Him, qualifying or quantifying Him via “science” etc., are all forms of self-decapitation. They are all vain attempts to subject God to our puny (by comparison) standards.

[spirited irish]

Amen.

[scottiemom]

Excellent post.

"Am I ashamed of the Gospel?"

This requires an answer on a daily basis. Christians must be God's hands and voice. We have no excuse for neglecting to witness for Christ. For years I felt excused because I did not want to offend someone but time grows short and the choice is of eternal consequence.

[spirited irish]

ping

[IAGeezer912]

As a Believer, I have always had a hard time accepting the theory of Evolution. However, I now believe that Democrats are descended from pond scum and are the product of the infinite negative mutations that had to have taken place. Since mutations create biological defects in a species it stands to reason that Democrats are dumber than pond scum. Which is why we need to drain the swamp.

[spirited irish]

:-)

[Scrambler Bob]

Another masterpiece by the tack-sharp Linda Kimball.
= = =

Kind of sounds like Chesterton.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Theistic evolutionists are among the biggest hypocrites on earth. Most of them accept "new testament" miracles which would have violated the "laws of nature" as six day young earth creationism. The whole argument against creationism is the uniformity of nature and of "natural law" throughout all time. Yet every single "new testament" miracle they believe in when subjected to the same standards could also never have happened!

These morons attack creationists (well, redneck creationists anyway) while defending a "seedless conception" and a baby that passes miraculously through the mother's side to leave hear hymen intact! And we're supposed to be intimidated by such people??? They have no credibility whatsoever.

[Hebrews 11:6]

Old-earth or progressive creationism by definition refutes macro-evolution. See the entire library of books by Dr. Hugh Ross.

[spirited irish]

From "Does Hugh Ross Believe in Soulless Ancient Humans?" Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, Answers in Depth via Answers in Genesis

Hugh Ross, author of Navigating Genesis and founder of Reasons to Believe (RTB), believes the ancient world was peopled with pre-Adamic intelligent but soulless human-like bipedal beings who painted on cave walls and buried their dead. Not being made in the image of God, however, they were only placeholders in this world with no possible place in the next.

Noting that this amounts to a belief that soulless humans, though Dr. Ross would not call them human, lived before Adam and Eve, we have often called attention to the inconsistencies of Dr. Ross’s position with the Word of God. The last time Ken Ham posted about this on Facebook, Dr. Fazale Rana, coauthor of Ross’s 2005 book Who Was Adam?, responded, “Ken Ham, You completely misrepresent the RTB view on hominids.”‬‬

Have we misrepresented Dr. Ross’s beliefs? I think not. Let’s examine his claims in light of science and the Bible.

Read More: https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/origins/does-hugh-ross-believe-in-soulless-ancient-humans/

[Hebrews 11:6]

Consider the source.

[spirited irish]

From: Progressive Creationist Hugh Ross, Who Is He and What Does He Believe? Christian Answers

Some Basic Assumptions of Hugh Ross

1. Billions of Years Old Universe

This is the central belief that guides much of his teachings. Again and again he states that the universe is billions of years old. Dr. Ross and other Progressive Creationists fervently believe that the size of the universe and various other astronomical discoveries prove this beyond any doubt. He rejects as nonsense all suggestions from science that Earth and the universe could be young. [See: Hugh Ross, Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 1994); ; Hugh Ross, The Fingerprint of God, second edition (Promise Publishing Co, 1991); etc.]

Our Brief Response

First it is important to remember the obvious. No scientist was there over the billions of years in question. The Creator is the only one existing from the very beginning. Only He is in a position to know with certainty the true history and age of the universe. His Word to humanity is clear. The Bible indicates that all Creation was completed during six rotations of the Earth. God’s Word provides lists of generations between Adam and Jesus Christ.

Even if there were a few gaps in the lists, it would be absurd to accept insertions of millions (or even tens of thousands) of years in the genealogy. Actually, the great majority of scientific age estimation methods indicate a young Earth. Dr. Ross’s bias is apparent in his willingness to accept only those scientific methods that agree with his belief in billions of years. In the final analysis, none of Man’s scientific age estimation methods can be considered foolproof, young or old. We would prefer to stick with the testimony of the only eyewitness, God.

2. Death Always, No Paradise Planet

Dr. Ross does not believe the Garden of Eden was free of death, suffering or degeneration—a world created in perfection. He believes that death and degeneration existed in the beginning and have continued for billions of years. He also teaches that neither the fall to sin nor the Flood resulted in significant physical changes in Nature. [Creation and Time, pp. 55, 65.]

Our brief response—Paradise lost

According to the Bible, death (both physical and spiritual) entered the world through man’s sin (Genesis 2:17, 3:19, Romans 5:12, 6:23, I Corinthians 15:20-23). The Bible indicates that our world is very different from the one which God created and pronounced as “very good.” The Bible clearly says animals were not created carnivorous; God originally commanded them to eat plants—see Genesis 1:29-30, etc. Because of sin, God cursed the ground and physical creation (Genesis 3:17). Scripture says the whole creation has been affected by man’s sin, causing it to groan as it awaits freedom from bondage to decay (Romans 8:20-22). The global Flood judgment changed Earth even more (Genesis 8:21). One day God will restore paradise. Once again the wolf will lie down with the lamb.

Dual Revelation!

Dr. Ross believes that Nature provides an accurate understanding of God and His plan for history. He holds the unorthodox theological view that, “The plan of salvation as stated in the Bible can be seen through observation of the universe around us.” For example, he teaches that Job “without the aid of scriptures… discerned all the elements of the gospel…”

Dr. Ross frequently says that Nature is like the “sixty-seventh book” of the Bible. Nature is “on an equal footing” with the written revelation of God. Dr. Ross states that neither is “inferior or superior” to the other. They are simply “different, just like the content of Ezra is distinct from that of Romans.” [Creation and Time, p. 57] He proceeds to accept most of the interpretations of secular science while attempting to maintain the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.

He has accused young-Earth creationists of believing in “Single-Revelation Theology” and denying “physical reality.” [The Fingerprint of God, second edition, (first quotation: p. 179), second quotation: p. 181, also see: 144-145, 163-164; Creation and Time , pp. 11, 41, 55-57, 123; “Hugh Ross’s Apologetics Hot Line,” Christianity Today (March 11, 1991), pp. 23; Hugh Ross, “Creation Days,” audiotape (Pasadena, California: Reasons to Believe, 1990).] [Creation and Time, pp. 55, 65.]

Our brief response—Dual Revelation, Yes. But…

Ross is incorrect about young-Earth Creation-scientists. Most, if not all, believe in Dual Revelation. To believe otherwise would undermine the very words of scripture. Obviously, mankind can learn many things about the physical laws and construction of God’s creation. Through this, we are able to understand the basics of God’s nature (His existence, His invisible attributes and His eternal power) (Romans 1:20). Dr. Ross extends Dual Revelationism to a dangerous extreme. The gospel cannot be fully discerned by Man in nature alone.

It is important to understand that:

Nature has no speech or voice (Psalm 19:3). Therefore, Nature is subject to Man’s misinterpretation, as the history of science has repeatedly demonstrated.

Man is particularly limited in his ability to know the ancient past with certainty. We have no time machines to travel back and examine actual events. Secular scientists who describe in great detail ancient animals and environments are guessing, making assumptions and hypothesizing.

The world and the universe have changed since their creation. The Fall and the global Flood of Noah greatly marred the perfection of God’s creations. What we see now is different in many ways from what God originally created.

We humans are quite ungod-like in our abilities and understanding. We are sinful, finite creatures with an enormous inclination to believe in lies. Earth is under the dominion of the Father of Lies, Satan. Our understanding of this universe is very incomplete and fallible. Scientific opinions are often biased and change regularly, sometimes radically.

Dr. Ross even goes so far as to make the strange claim that “in addition to the words of the Bible being ‘God-breathed, …useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness,’ so also are the words of God spoken through the work of His hands.” [Creation and Time, p. 56.] Dr. Ross elevates the message of creation beyond its natural limitations. On many matters, it is naive, pompous and exceedingly dangerous to rate sinful Man’s incomplete and changing understanding of this degenerating universe as equal in clarity with the written Word of God! Such views have led to dreadful errors. The Bible has demonstrated its beautiful accuracy again and again, in contrast to the “scientific” pronouncements of Man which have frequently been wrong and often dominated by blinding bias.

Continue Reading: https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c014.html

[Ezekiel]

Am I ashamed of the Gospel?

Hi ZC!

On another frequency entirely, puns are lowest form of humor. Truly awful. Folks just aren't prepared to fall in love.

As you know, all the commandments total 613, which is the same as "in the Torah" [בתורה].

The good news ('gospel' truth!) is that all boils down to a "Jewish pun":

משחק מילים יהודי

= 613

And a particularly good one [משחק מילים יהודי טוב] = 630, chopped liver [געהאקטע לעבער] .

If people only understood that King David was like Ferris Bueller, a righteous dude [דוד]. Grace knew.

The harvest truly is plenteous, but the pun-stars are few.

Isaac = "he will laugh"

(In Isaac is Abraham's seed called.)

You ever seen the etym. debate over the name change from Avram to Avraham? Scholars are perplexed over the reason given, as in what kind of grammar/word logic is that?

Seriously, how complicated is it? The letter hei (= 5) was planted in the middle of his name, and one of the meanings of the letter hei is "seed", as in "Hei is seed for you." ~ Yosef.

And then back in Genesis 15, God told Avram, "Look now toward heaven, and count *the* stars, if thou be able to number them", and he said unto him, "So shall thy seed be."

That's *ha* kokavim, 5 stars, the best of the best.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

And then what do you know, Avram is so perfectly excellent that God drops that hei into his name, and along comes Isaac.

Hay is seed for you!

Thanks for playing!

(You know, there's something about this place. Everybody seems so grim.)

[spirited irish]

"For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me." John 5:46

The all important question is this: Why do Hugh Ross, you and his followers freely choose the evolutionary thinking of fallible men over Jesus Christ who spoke creation into existence (Genesis 1; John 1)?

"Six days before the Passover, Jesus therefore came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead." John 12:1

When Jesus spoke the name Lazarus, in the twinkling of an eye the matter of Lazarus' body regenerated and his soul re-entered and reanimated his body. The raising of Lazarus from death is a microcosmic creation event. If our Lord had to wait upon evolution, Lazarus would still be in his grave.

Furthermore, do you not know that fallen Powers, Principalities, and Elemental Spirits have been teaching evolution since Babylon and that Satan implied it when he said, 'surely you will not die"? Today, so-called Space Brothers (extraterrestrials) teach evolution.

[Hebrews 11:6]

I posted solely to distinguish between evolutionists and progressive creationists. Dr. Ross has specifically refuted macro-evolution in the most voluminous and able way, and his work speaks for itself. I leave it at that.