shernren
you are not reading this.
- Feb 17, 2005
- 8,463
- 515
- 37
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
Actually, I would say yes to a certain degree - especially if the post itself gave a different reason.
If the post itself gave a reason not to be quoted for debate and discussion then I fully apologize. But I would think that the mere fact of "this was posted on Creationists and Creationists is a no-evo-debaters-allowed forum" wouldn't. But again, I apologize. I was a little too testy when I wrote that.
Every time a TE says that to be consistent YECs would have to be flat earth geocentrists.
Okay. I get what you mean. But I don't find that argument baseless; the issue of geocentrism and its relation to Scripture is also discussed in the thread I cited.
Worship does not consist solely of hymns, etc. It is an outgrowth, an expression of what one holds to be the final authority - the ultimate source of truth. To a conservative, the scriptures represent a direct revelation from the eternal God who we esteem -- and that makes them a better authority than an indirect revelation from His creation arrived at through our own reasonings. We must trust what He says above all else.
If you look at the "just because" thread I started - I tried to say that very point quite clearly. I do believe some TEs take it too far -- trusting "science" over direct revelation, and some YECs take it too far in the other direction - honoring the "love letter" more than the author.
Alright, I'll admit that my laziness to check that thread has caused a misunderstanding. But ever since I've been back (not long ) I'm trying to make it a point not to look at the Creationist sub-forum at all, if possible. Flee from temptation! XD
But I would think that Scripture (which is the "direct revelation" you allude to) is not a direct revelation of God. It is indirect. What God communicated through Scripture He communicated through human words (which are imperfect), by human writers (who are fallible, although the ideas of infallibility and inerrancy to which I too subscribe make provision for that), and in the context of human culture (which always contains elements of sin and ignorance).
But we know that Jesus is the direct revelation of God. "He who has seen Me has seen the Father"; Scripture never claims that of itself but only of Jesus. Scripture's authority is derivative from God; but Jesus is God. In fact, the need for Christianity to accommodate this idea (that a man can be fully identified with and fully reveal God) is to me the principal reason why we need such a difficult and mysterious doctrine as the Trinity. Nothing created could reveal God in His entirety (not science, not the Bible, not the church at present) so that Jesus, who claims to reveal God fully, must be uncreated - and therefore God.
Take away the uniqueness of Jesus' direct revelation and one takes away the Trinity and the whole point of Christianity. And while I am not going to call anyone a Bibliolater, the idea of Scripture as direct revelation which is so enshrined in YEC thought comes dangerously close to doing just that.
Upvote
0