Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
Isnt Jesus and Paul verifing, that God had revealed the Gospel to the prophets, and this is what we are to have faith in.?
Yes it is.
Couldn't agree more. They are taking the scriptures, written for very different times and to very different situations and listeners, and reinterpreting them in line with their own ministry. Just like the rabbis did when they interpreted the same passages to refer to the Jewish nation or to some other Messiah. They are, in other words, reading the Old Testament symbollicallynot literally.
So it is no argument that the Gospel writers, Jesus or St. Paul are reading the Bible "literally" when that isn't in fact what they are doing.
They are adding to the symbolic levels of meaning of the passages; but that doesn't mean that their original ("literal") meaning doesn't remain. None of the writers "intended" to make prophecies about Jesus; they "intended" to send a message to the people of their own time. Which they did, and which was interpreted as such at the time. (As can be seen by simply reading the passages in the context of their original books.)
Do yourself a favour and familiarise yourself with these OT prophecies
Do yourself a favour and don't assume that I'm not already familiar with them.
__________________ "Call some place paradise/Kiss it goodbye"
The Eagles, the Last Resort
Liberal Christians do it in context
"Literalism is the first line of defense of a mind that wants to put itself to sleep." Walter A Davis
Couldn't agree more. They are taking the scriptures, written for very different times and to very different situations and listeners, and reinterpreting them in line with their own ministry. Just like the rabbis did when they interpreted the same passages to refer to the Jewish nation or to some other Messiah. They are, in other words, reading the Old Testament symbollicallynot literally.
I couldnt disagree more Artybloke. There is no way these scriptures could have refered to any other figure in history, other than Jesus life and ministry.After his (literal) ressurection, he opened their minds to understand the scriptures...and showed them this There is only one Messiah, and he is the only begotton
So it is no argument that the Gospel writers, Jesus or St. Paul are reading the Bible "literally" when that isn't in fact what they are doing.
He would be born of a virgin-be betrayed, grow up in Naz, born in bethlehem, suffer, rise from the dead----looks like this is what they were doing..
They are adding to the symbolic levels of meaning of the passages; but that doesn't mean that their original ("literal") meaning doesn't remain. None of the writers "intended" to make prophecies about Jesus; they "intended" to send a message to the people of their own time. Which they did, and which was interpreted as such at the time. (As can be seen by simply reading the passages in the context of their original books.)
Jesus would tell you that Abraham saw his day, and was glad. All the prophets were raised up after Solomon, to tell the people that Messiah would come, and the dream of someone on the throne of David was not lost . and would yet be realised-
__________________ The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
There is no way these scriptures could have refered to any other figure in history, other than Jesus life and ministry.
That would make them totally meaningless to the people who wrote them, let alone to the people who first heard them. You think God is the author of confusion? I don't deny that they also refer to Christ, but in the first instance they had a meaning that was relevant to their first hearers. Otherwise, you have a text that is nonsense for several hundred years.
Why do you assume that texts only have one meaning anyway? That's not true of Shakespeare, and it's certainly not true of the Bible.
__________________ "Call some place paradise/Kiss it goodbye"
The Eagles, the Last Resort
Liberal Christians do it in context
"Literalism is the first line of defense of a mind that wants to put itself to sleep." Walter A Davis
That would make them totally meaningless to the people who wrote them, let alone to the people who first heard them. You think God is the author of confusion?
Its much the same as in the new testament-Jesus promised to specifically come back, its taken close to 2000 years, but will we lose hope---nup-- It is very specific, when it comes to prophecy- otherwise you run the risk of being a false prophet..
I don't deny that they also refer to Christ, but in the first instance they had a meaning that was relevant to their first hearers. Otherwise, you have a text that is nonsense for several hundred years.
It can only mean what it means (if you know what i mean), and my personal confidence comes from the insight given by Jesus and Paul, as they shed light on it.
Why do you assume that texts only have one meaning anyway? That's not true of Shakespeare, and it's certainly not true of the Bible.
Because Jesus is the only way to the father, and it was he that was promised to the whole world, and the prophets bear him testamony, and no-one else.
__________________ The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
It is very specific, when it comes to prophecy- otherwise you run the risk of being a false prophet..
Prophecy in the OT had nothing to do with prophesying the future. It had to do with the proclamation of God's message to the people of God - so that they would turn from their evil ways and follow God. It can hardly do that if the people don't actually understand it. Jonah prophesied the fall of Ninevah - did it happen? No, because the people repented. The prophets prophesised the fall of Isreal and Judah if the people didn't return to God, institute justice for the poor, support the widows and orphans. The people didn't repent, the nations fell.
Prophesy is not divination. Prophecy is preaching.
As for reading the Bible through that modern equivalent of the heresy of chiliasm, dispensationalism, good luck to you. A Bible that was nonsense in the 1st century is nonsense in this. But the Bible isn't nonsense.
Because Jesus is the only way to the father, and it was he that was promised to the whole world, and the prophets bear him testamony, and no-one else.
I don't see what that has to do with the fact that there were and are multiple readings of the Bible. If there weren't multiple readings, there wouldn't be so many denominations, all claiming to be THE one.
__________________ "Call some place paradise/Kiss it goodbye"
The Eagles, the Last Resort
Liberal Christians do it in context
"Literalism is the first line of defense of a mind that wants to put itself to sleep." Walter A Davis
There is currently a spectrum of belief regarding origins, and this is tied loosely to how literal one reads Scripture and/or the degree to which one is willing to allow the evidence of God’s Creation inform their beliefs *about* that Creation. We must keep in mind that every position except the one on top, the Flat-earthers, involves a certain degree of allowance of scientific knowledge to influence Scriptural interpretation.
1. Flat-earthers - believe that a plain reading of Scripture indicates that the earth is flat. Very few still hold on to this belief.
2. Geocentrists - believe that the sun and all the stars literally revolve around the earth. Still a surprising number of these around, although the movement suffered a major setback after the late 60's. They have lots of Scripture and theological bases to argue from, however, and insist that a literal reading of Scriptures requires geocentrism. Ironically, they hold young earth creationists (below) in the same light as theistic evolutionists: those who have let secular science alter their view away from a plain, literal reading of Scripture. A recent shake up over at ICR (or possibly it was AiG) occured when the group finally denounced geocentrism and a number of their contributing members quit because they were geocentrist.
3. Young Earth Creationists - believe that the earth and universe are both young (less than 10,000 years old) and that all the diversity of species is the result of special creation, based on a literal reading of Scripture (even if not AS literal as those above).
4. Gap Theorists (a form of Old Earth Creationism) - Believe that the earth and universe were created at the time science says, but that God created Man and all the animals at the "young earth" time frame. Some believe this is a "recreation", God having scrapped an earlier version (dinosaurs, etc).
5. Progressive Creationists (aka "Day-Age Creationists", another form of OEC)- Believe that the earth and universe were created at the time science says, but that each "day" in Genesis referred to an indefinite period of time. Genesis is a historically and scientifically accurate account, just that it happened over a VERY long time period.
6. Theistic Evolutionists (with a literal Adam and Eve) - believe in an old earth and universe, but accept that God used evolution as part of His creation, basically as science describes it. But they feel that there was a literal Adam and Eve in a literal Garden. Some attribute this Adam and Eve to an instance of special creation, others to election as "representatives", etc. Also believe in biogenesis, not abiogenesis.
7. Theistic Evolutionists (no literal Adam and Eve, but biogenesis) - believe that Man evolved along with the other species (pursuant to God’s plan), but that the initial spark of life was immediately God induced. Some even push this forward to some mass special creation of a variety of "kinds" around the Cambrian period, with all the species evolving from there.
8. Theistic Evolutionists (abiogenesis) - God created everything and established the full system of natural laws upon with the universe and the earth would work. And it did. With life arising at the time and place He had known it would, etc.
A bit of a side category is the Intelligent Design movement of recent years. This asserts that *whatever* you accept about creation, there is firm evidence that the universe and the earth in particular were designed with specific intelligence, by a designer, and not happening randomly. Those holding this opinion come in each of the flavors mentioned above, although the most recent and influential of these have been Theistic Evolutionists (ie, they accept that species evolved over billions of years, including man, but that God directed the process all the way, it was not random or wholly naturalistic).
So, where do you fit in? I don’t necessarily want everyone to post their "number", but it is interesting to see it all laid out like this. If any have suggestions or tweaks to make to the this list, go ahead and say so.
The Bible was written before we had the tools to study the history of the earth. In a way, inserting a totally new creation story would change the plot, but there are three things that stand out.
The Beginning (Big Bang, and formation of the first living thing)
Redemption through Christ (peace with the Father through the shedding of his blood)
The Ending (Christ returns according to every acceptable Christian creed)
Astonishingly, we formed here at the exact midpoint between the formation of the solar system and the end of it.
That's pretty amazing for an amazing God, isn't it?
__________________ This is the mysterion of the gospel: At the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, "mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other," Psalm 85:10. All who believe in the one sent by God the Father, who know Jesus as their Lord and Master, have eternal life in him. Repent of your sins: believe on him, and you shall be saved.
5. Progressive Creationists (aka "Day-Age Creationists", another form of OEC)- Believe that the earth and universe were created at the time science says, but that each "day" in Genesis referred to an indefinite period of time. Genesis is a historically and scientifically accurate account, just that it happened over a VERY long time period.
This one describes me best.
__________________
"No truth in the world is randomized, expose the lies, no matter how they're disguised!" -- Matt Morginsky, "Grounded"
I'm a young earth creationist. I do a lot of studying under Dr. Hovind, i'm sad to hear what had happened to him on my birthday. But I'm still praying for him. I listen to lectures of other young earth creationists such as Dr. Donald Chittick, Dr. Ray Rempt, Dr. Steve Wolfe and Dr. John McKay. I do believe in a six day 24 hour creation just like Genesis says. And I do believe that man did live along side dinosaurs. They were created hours before God made man.
Last edited by SuperSaint4GodDBZStyle; 23rd November 2006 at 12:01 PM.
I'm torn between options six and seven. If I were forced to choose, I'd probably choose a representative model of theistic evolution- God endowed Adam and Eve to be the representatives of the first human community to whom he granted souls by covenant.
6. Theistic Evolutionists (with a literal Adam and Eve) - believe in an old earth and universe, but accept that God used evolution as part of His creation, basically as science describes it. But they feel that there was a literal Adam and Eve in a literal Garden. Some attribute this Adam and Eve to an instance of special creation, others to election as "representatives", etc. Also believe in biogenesis, not abiogenesis.
I would say I'm more this. Isn't this the best mix of faith and what the science says?
Linear Mode
