| Fundamentalist Christians The forum for fundamentalist & conservative churches of all Christian denominations. |
|
View Poll Results: In which Creationist Camp do you stand? | |
Young Earth Creationism
|     | 33 | 64.71% | |
Day-Age Creationism
|    | 2 | 3.92% | |
Old Earth Creationism
|    | 11 | 21.57% | |
The Gap Theory
|    | 5 | 9.80% |
 | | 
6th March 2007, 02:56 AM
|  | Contender for the Faith
27     
 | | Join Date: 15th May 2005 Location: Mill Creek, WA.
Posts: 3,655
Blessings: 95,560
Reps: 7,619 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by BereanTodd  I personally believe in YEC, but I have no problem with any other Christian view that does not allow for macro-evolution. When we give in to the lies of evolution is where I take my stand.  |
8th March 2007, 10:39 AM
|  | Formerly Jtbdad Christian on every board!
    
| | Join Date: 14th April 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,965
Blessings: 81,772
Reps: 2,383,015,851,206,685 (power: 2,383,015,851,224) | | Originally Posted by BereanTodd I personally believe in YEC, but I have no problem with any other Christian view that does not allow for macro-evolution. When we give in to the lies of evolution is where I take my stand.
I can agree with this. 
__________________ Just a Christian
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy; O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
|
8th March 2007, 12:06 PM
|  | Shining God's Light for a Lost World.
38 
| | Join Date: 1st September 2004 Location: The United States of America!
Posts: 11,752
Blessings: 99,948,110 My Mood 
Reps: 6,756,643,773,531,785,216 (power: 6,756,643,773,531,804) | | | Young Earth Creation!
__________________
"Oh, give thanks to the Lord, for He is good! For His mercy endures forever." -- Psalm 136:1 |
8th March 2007, 05:01 PM
|  | Senior Veteran
| | Join Date: 4th January 2006
Posts: 2,333
Blessings: 71,916
Reps: 9,577 (power: 18) | | YEC. It is the only choice which takes into account the plain reading of Gen.1 and 2, and the NT verses on the subject.
(including) Rom 5:12 Wherefore,as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
If there was no death before Adam sinned, there simply couldn't have been an earlier creation that was wiped out.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
8th March 2007, 07:23 PM
|  | Salvation is of the Lord
37  
| | Join Date: 29th September 2006 Location: Canada
Posts: 5,418
Blessings: 2,815,652 My Mood 
Reps: 154,244,349,522,329,856 (power: 154,244,349,522,340) | | Originally Posted by BereanTodd I personally believe in YEC, but I have no problem with any other Christian view that does not allow for macro-evolution. When we give in to the lies of evolution is where I take my stand. Originally Posted by DeaconDean I'm one who holds to the opinion that both young and old have their credits. However, being Fundamentalist, I do not see it as an issue. Genesis 1 & 2 give us the account of the creation. And I accept it as such. To me it does not matter whether it took God a milli-second, six seconds, six minutes, six hours, six days, six months, six years,or six billion years. What is of utmost importance to me is that God created it. That is all that matters to me. One day we will be able to ask the who, what, when, where, and how's, but till then, all I need to know is that my God created it. plain and simple.
To me it is a simple matter, God said it, Jesus created it, and the Spirit moved upon it and from chaos came order.
I agree with both of these. I lean towards believing in YEC, but have heard some excellent arguments for OEC that really got me thinking. So I wouldn't rule that out completely. Either way, I too draw the line at the theory of evolution. It's important to know the difference between misteries and lies.  |
8th March 2007, 07:43 PM
| | Flaming Calvinist
27 
| | Join Date: 29th April 2004
Posts: 15,107
Blessings: 138,922
Reps: 4,248,754,869 (power: 4,248,777) | | Originally Posted by desmalia I agree with both of these. I lean towards believing in YEC, but have heard some excellent arguments for OEC that really got me thinking. So I wouldn't rule that out completely. Either way, I too draw the line at the theory of evolution. It's important to know the difference between misteries and lies.
Just a clarification on scientific terminology. The meaning of the word "theory" is very different in science than in, say, a murder investigation. If scientists consider a certain model to be a theory, this means that they consider it to be as close to truth as science can come. For example, gravitational theory, atomic theory, electromagnetic theory, quantum theory, and the kinetic theory of gases are all called theories, but they are regarded as truth. Whatever your position, it's important to get terminology right. In science, if you say that something is "only a theory," you are effectively saying that it is true.
__________________
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18) |
8th March 2007, 08:07 PM
| | Salvation is of the Lord
37
| | Join Date: 29th September 2006 Location: Canada
Posts: 5,418
Blessings: 2,815,652 My Mood
Reps: 154,244,349,522,329,856 (power: 154,244,349,522,340) | | Originally Posted by arunma Just a clarification on scientific terminology. The meaning of the word "theory" is very different in science than in, say, a murder investigation. If scientists consider a certain model to be a theory, this means that they consider it to be as close to truth as science can come. For example, gravitational theory, atomic theory, electromagnetic theory, quantum theory, and the kinetic theory of gases are all called theories, but they are regarded as truth. Whatever your position, it's important to get terminology right. In science, if you say that something is "only a theory," you are effectively saying that it is true.
Thank you for pointing that out. I agree that scientists tend to mix the concepts of theory and truth, to a degree that much of our society actually believes evolution to be fact now. But I will venture to say that just because scientists believe their theories to be truth, or close to it, we shouldn't blindly take them as undeniable fact. Science is great, don't get me wrong. It's a wonderful tool used to explore our reality, but it does have its limitations. |
8th March 2007, 11:04 PM
|  | Ave Maria Gratia Plena
29 
| | Join Date: 31st May 2004 Location: United States
Posts: 69,972
Blessings: 724,607 My Mood 
Reps: 233,180,187,640,399,616 (power: 233,180,187,640,476) | | I'm a Young Earth Creationist.  I take the Bible at its word. |
8th March 2007, 11:41 PM
| | Flaming Calvinist
27
| | Join Date: 29th April 2004
Posts: 15,107
Blessings: 138,922
Reps: 4,248,754,869 (power: 4,248,777) | | Originally Posted by desmalia Thank you for pointing that out. I agree that scientists tend to mix the concepts of theory and truth, to a degree that much of our society actually believes evolution to be fact now. But I will venture to say that just because scientists believe their theories to be truth, or close to it, we shouldn't blindly take them as undeniable fact. Science is great, don't get me wrong. It's a wonderful tool used to explore our reality, but it does have its limitations.
Regarding theory and truth, perhaps I can elaborate further. Ideally, science takes advantage of the cause/effect way in which nature works. Rarely do scientists see the cause, but we generally see the effect. When dealing with any phenomenon, the cause is deduced by examining the effect. So in some sense, science cannot be used to determine absolute truth. A scientific model is essentially a reconstruction of the cause on the basis of its observed effect. Once a model has been experimentally verified numerous times, it is called a theory, and is regarded as effectively true, for all intents and purposes. Scientists call evolution a theory because it has met the necessary tests (I hate to say it, but this is the case). As to whether or not that makes it true in the absolute sense, that's for you to decide on the basis of the given information, as well as the Scriptures, because science doesn't deduce absolute truth.
__________________
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18) |
9th March 2007, 05:03 AM
| | Contender for the Faith
27
| | Join Date: 15th May 2005 Location: Mill Creek, WA.
Posts: 3,655
Blessings: 95,560
Reps: 7,619 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by oliveplants YEC. It is the only choice which takes into account the plain reading of Gen.1 and 2
So you accept that Adam and Eve replenished (refilled) the Earth?
[bible]Genesis 1:28[/bible]
It is important to note that the words 'fill' and 'replenish' in the OT are translated from the same Hebrew word. However, whereas this is translated 'fill' in Genesis 1:22, it is translated 'replenish' in Genesis 1:28. Why did the KJV translators choose to do this? Because they were guided by the Holy Spirit to choose that word in particular. Plain reading would seem to indicate that Adam and Eve were refilling what was once full at an earlier time.
That is only further evidence that the KJV is the true word of God, and "modern bibles" are not. 
If there was no death before Adam sinned, there simply couldn't have been an earlier creation that was wiped out.
If nobody sinned before Adam, are you suggesting that Satan didn't sin when he rebelled against God?
'World' is translated from the Greek kosmos, which does not describe the Earth itself, but its inhabitants. Kosmos often speaks of great numbers of people, multitudes, or all of humanity. In this case, all of humanity.
The Pre-Adamites were not human. They were angelic beings.
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
