why are christians "challenging" the young earth creationism?

[Harlan Norris]

One question, if I may: do you believe that we live within a God inspired Creation that is unknowable? If so, then what does that say about the character of God?

OK, small fib there. Two questions if I may.

Well, so far we don't know.I don't know if we ever will.God told us the truth,and we just don't believe.That says more about us than it does about him.

 

[chaoschristian]

god's word is the bible and the bible makes no mistake about anything, that's what i know

and by challenging it, i think you know what i am talking about, they are questioning it and putting their own ideas ahead of it by trying to shape the word of god around their own ideas

OK, that gets us someplace.

You believe the Bible is the Word of God, eternal, infallible, and inerrant, correct?

You believe that by questioning the Word of God, that we somehow affront the righteousness of God, yes?

 

[chaoschristian]

i don't understand what you mean by these questions but if you mean do i think that the creation around me shows the magnitude of god, absolutely, he is all around us.

Does Creation itself stand as a revelation of God's character, will, and intent (His truth) just as scripture stands as a revelation of God's truth?

and i think reason and science is part of the free will god has given us, it's a gift to be able to explore.

So, science (and perhaps reason? You didn't mention that in your answer) are endowed by God in His desire for us to freely explore Creation. Do I have that right?

and what do you mean by creation being corrupted and deceitful? if you would explain your questions more thoroughly, maybe i would be able to answer them better.

These are all standard questions I tend to ask of folks who come along and seem genuinely interested in asking questions and exploring the possibilities of how we relate to God and Creation.

It has been my experience that some (not all) YECs hold that because of the fall Creation itself is corrupted by sin, and is inherently deceitful. This being the case, any examination of Creation will not bring us closer to God's truth, but in fact move us farther away from it.

However, there are creationists do not hold this position, and believe that Creation is not basically corrupted.

There is a huge difference in the POV of the two, and a huge difference in how one engages with a creationist who holds the former position rather than the latter.

It helps to know your response to these questions, because it helps me understand you and where you are coming from in relation to this particular topic.

 

[Dannager]

Well, so far we don't know.I don't know if we ever will.God told us the truth,and we just don't believe.That says more about us than it does about him.

I think the fact that we were given the capacity to observe, reason and draw conclusions about the world around us and that many of us don't use those capacities says a lot about us.

 

[Dylan_Chica]

You believe the Bible is the Word of God, eternal, infallible, and inerrant, correct?

You believe that by questioning the Word of God, that we somehow affront the righteousness of God, yes?

yes, i'm not ashamed to admit it either, i have read the bible all my life and i think it is the absolute truth and it makes no mistake, it is the word of god and it will always be, it is one of his greatest gifts to us.

and yes i do believe that god's word should not be challenged of questioned, which is why i'm having a small personal crisis with myself right now because i feel i am doing that myself by openin more up to evolution after coming to this forum.

 

[Dylan_Chica]

Does Creation itself stand as a revelation of God's character, will, and intent (His truth) just as scripture stands as a revelation of God's truth?



So, science (and perhaps reason? You didn't mention that in your answer) are endowed by God in His desire for us to freely explore Creation. Do I have that right?

for your first question, yes i think it does, as well as it is his gift to us it displays both his power and his love.

as for your second question, i don't understand everything you say ok? if you mean that god has given us free will and thus an ability to explore science, then yes, it is all part of his gift to us, which is the gift of life.

 

[chaoschristian]

yes, i'm not ashamed to admit it either, i have read the bible all my life and i think it is the absolute truth and it makes no mistake, it is the word of god and it will always be, it is one of his greatest gifts to us.

And I did not mean to imply that you ought to feel ashamed. While I may disagree with you, i certainly do not want to shame you for your convictions.

Keep in mind that I am not setting you up for some logic bomb down the road, I'm just trying to understand your position.

and yes i do believe that god's word should not be challenged of questioned, which is why i'm having a small personal crisis with myself right now because i feel i am doing that myself by openin more up to evolution after coming to this forum.

I think I can understand your misgivings. May I encourage you to stick with it? Not so that I might see you converted over to my way of thinking, but so that you might have the benefit of saying that your faith was strong enough to allow you to engage in this exploration.

Remeber the story of the prodigal son, the father rejoiced greatly at the return of his missing child. If you feel that exploring this issues will make you 'lost' in some manner, find comfort in the fact that God will rejoice with great love at your sight, regardless of where you have been or what you have done.

 

[chaoschristian]

for your first question, yes i think it does, as well as it is his gift to us it displays both his power and his love.

as for your second question, i don't understand everything you say ok? if you mean that god has given us free will and thus an ability to explore science, then yes, it is all part of his gift to us, which is the gift of life.

Well, in this regard I think you and I are on the same page.

 

[Gwenyfur]

2 Peter 3:3-5
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Here, right here, in the New Testament, which TE's believe, there is a warning of the Theory of Evolution.

Yet TE's and Evolutionists cling tightly to the feeling that the Bible isn't true, parts if not all of it is filled with "allegorical tales" "mythical stories" or just outright "rediculous"

 

[Dannager]

Here, right here, in the New Testament, which TE's believe, there is a warning of the Theory of Evolution.

I respect your personal interpretation of this passage while at the same time disagreeing with it.

Yet TE's and Evolutionists cling tightly to the feeling that the Bible isn't true, parts if not all of it is filled with "allegorical tales" "mythical stories" or just outright "rediculous"

OKAY, STOP. NO ONE here is claiming that the Bible isn't true. The position of TEs is that the Bible is allegorical in parts and that's it. We hold that the Bible's message is true but that parts of it were not intended literally or in a historically factual sense, supported by scientifically uncontested modern findings and the well-documented context of the culture the books were written in. You would do well to stop saying things like "TEs cling to the feeling that the Bible isn't true."

 

[Gwenyfur]

OKAY, STOP. NO ONE here is claiming that the Bible isn't true. The position of TEs is that the Bible is allegorical in parts and that's it. We hold that the Bible's message is true but that parts of it were not intended literally or in a historically factual sense, supported by scientifically uncontested modern findings and the well-documented context of the culture the books were written in. You would do well to stop saying things like "TEs cling to the feeling that the Bible isn't true."

...Emphasis mine...

so which is it...

true or mythical? and science determines which is which...


and it's more like
"TE's cling to the feeling that [parts of] the Bible isn't true"

Better?

 

[chaoschristian]

...Emphasis mine...

so which is it...

true or mythical? and science determines which is which...


and it's more like
"TE's cling to the feeling that [parts of] the Bible isn't true"

Better?

Literal does not equal truth.

Non-literal does not equal non-truth.

It is possible for scripture to convey God's truth and not be literal, historic (in a modern sense) and scientific (in a modern sense).

All of scripture reveals truth. All of scripture conveys truth.

All of scripture is not factual.

The two things are different and do not equate.

 

[chaoschristian]

Here, right here, in the New Testament, which TE's believe, there is a warning of the Theory of Evolution.

Yet TE's and Evolutionists cling tightly to the feeling that the Bible isn't true, parts if not all of it is filled with "allegorical tales" "mythical stories" or just outright "rediculous"

Yes, let's look at Peter's message shall we?

2 Peter 3 (New International Version)

2 Peter 3
The Day of the Lord

1Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. 2I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.
3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.[a]

Can you honestly say that Peter is providing a literal warning against the theory of evolution in this passage, such as you claim?

Honestly you cannot.

This passage is about providing both correction and a message of hope to a certain group of followers.

They seem to be concerned that the whole "I'll be returning soon" thing isn't happening soon enough for them. Peter is saying, look, God keeps His promises, look at the evidence we have from scripture. And soon to you may not be the same as soon to God, since God doesn't experience time like we do. So quit the griping already will ya?

Saying that this passage somehow supports your assertions regarding evolutionary theory is like me saying its a recipe for my grandmother's stuffed cabbages.

 

[Willtor]

This is probably the greatest evidence that I have that YEC's aren't hearing what TE's have to say. I think I've seen dozens (indicating the existence of probably hundreds) of posts in which TE's try to differentiate the terms: myth and lie/fallacy. Why is it not getting through? I have never seen a Christian evolutionist on these forums indicate that (s)he thought that Genesis was a lie. I have actually changed my "origins life view" in my profile to be more explicit.

Please, please, please, if you are a YEC, even if you remain a YEC, please just listen to what's being said, and don't mix up myth and lie/fallacy. Even if you still don't think Genesis is a myth, don't mix them up. That's not how we're using the terms.

 

[PaladinValer]

The Bible isn't the Word of God.

I don't think Jesus appreciates having a book ascribed to a title that is His only.

 

[Dannager]

...Emphasis mine...

so which is it...

true or mythical? and science determines which is which...


and it's more like
"TE's cling to the feeling that [parts of] the Bible isn't true"

Better?

No, not better. Why do you keep clinging to this idea that truth and literal, historical fact are the same thing. They aren't. Moral messages can be true even if they do not make reference to something that actually happened. That is the purpose of the Genesis account. It exists for moral and spiritual reasons, not to provide a history textbook view of how the world got here.

 

[Dylan_Chica]

This is probably the greatest evidence that I have that YEC's aren't hearing what TE's have to say. I think I've seen dozens (indicating the existence of probably hundreds) of posts in which TE's try to differentiate the terms: myth and lie/fallacy. Why is it not getting through? I have never seen a Christian evolutionist on these forums indicate that (s)he thought that Genesis was a lie. I have actually changed my "origins life view" in my profile to be more explicit.

Please, please, please, if you are a YEC, even if you remain a YEC, please just listen to what's being said, and don't mix up myth and lie/fallacy. Even if you still don't think Genesis is a myth, don't mix them up. That's not how we're using the terms.

i didn't even know it was this common among christians to believe in evolution until i came to this forum, why are you inplying that people who believe in a young earth are close-minded?

 

[Willtor]

i didn't even know it was this common among christians to believe in evolution until i came to this forum, why are you inplying that people who believe in a young earth are close-minded?

No. I am talking about the people on this forum. Many of them continually associate myths with lies or falsehoods, even after being told that that's not what we mean. It is, by its very nature, putting words into our mouths that would never actually come from us. It's belittling. "God would never lie," is not an appropriate response to, "Genesis is a myth." "TE's have mistaken the literary genre of Genesis and it was intended as a factual account," is an appropriate one.

I'm frustrated that I'm repeatedly being told that I don't believe God because I think I know something about the literary style He used in a certain place in the Bible.

 

[Deamiter]

*** MOD HAT ON ***
There are two very different and often isolated worldviews clashing here. Some of the assumptions people make from all perspectives are going to be insulting, but at the same time it seems pretty clear that everybody is here for a productive discussion.

Multiple comments here have been insulting, but remember that it's a clash of worldviews, not intended as personal attacks.
*** MOD HAT OFF ***

 

[Marshall Janzen]

Yet TE's and Evolutionists cling tightly to the feeling that the Bible isn't true, parts if not all of it is filled with "allegorical tales" "mythical stories" or just outright "rediculous"

I've been studying John's gospel lately in my small group at church. The word "true" is an important one in this gospel, and if one misunderstands it as meaning "literal", as in the quote above, one is likely to be quite confused. Here are some things that are true about Jesus:

"The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world." (John 1:9, ESV)

Jesus' incarnation wasn't about literal light coming into the world, as in photons. The statement is true but not literal.

"Jesus then said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.' ... So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, 'I am the bread that came down from heaven.' " (John 6:32, 41)

Though this is another can of worms, I don't think that Jesus is literal bread. The statement is true but not literal.

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit." (John 15:1-2)

Jesus isn't a literal vine. The statement is true but not literal.

Based on the use of the word within Scripture, I'm surprised there is so much confusion over how something can be non-literal and still true.