YEC = my problems with this pseudo-science...

[gluadys]

Let me ask you, if the Bible never existed, tell how you would know who Christ is and what He did for you on that Cross?

In the way that God chose to make the gospel known, absent a printed book. Why do you think that the bible is the only way God speaks?

Tell me, who here gets upset when they are told they have less faith? I would assume most. So tell me, if this bothers you why then do you the same to the yec-ist? You call yec's faith non-existent when you claim they worship the Bible and not God. You wrongfully call us false idolators.

I, for one, specifically did not. I said:

I don't think that is true of all or even most YECs,

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Originally posted by YawehLove:

Psa 68:11 The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it.

Psa 56:10 In God will I praise his word: in the LORD will I praise his word.

Psa 130:5 I wait for the LORD, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope.

Psa 119:89 LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

Psa 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Psa 119:169 TAU. Let my cry come near before thee, O LORD: give me understanding according to thy word.

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Psa 119:107 I am afflicted very much: quicken me, O LORD, according unto thy word.

Not one of those verses is about the Bible.

 

[TwinCrier]

Originally posted by YawehLove:


Not one of those verses is about the Bible.

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
...and my signature.

 

[Gold Dragon]

1) It makes no predictions.
2) Its sole existence is based on the facts of its opposition.
3) Those who believe it in recognize that they can say nothing to sway the skeptic.
4) It claims to be science when it has not made a single verifiable scientific solution of its own.
5) Many of its followers are judgemental and self-righteous.
6) It does not allow for mistakes.
etc...

I believe that these criticisms should be more correctly aimed at the field of "Creation Science" rather than YECs. There are many YECs who do not subscribe to the pseudo-science of "Creation Science" and still believe in YEC.

 

[gluadys]

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
...and my signature.

Those verses are not about the bible either.

 

[MLML]

In the way that God chose to make the gospel known, absent a printed book. Why do you think that the bible is the only way God speaks?

So then you believe that the whole world would know of Jesus Christ, His life, HIs death, His ressurection, and who He is, if the Bible was not present? I am not asking can God do it another way, because He is God and everything is possible for Him. I am asking if everything is the same, nothing changes other then the elimination of the Bible, you would know Christ as you know HIm now?

Do you honestly believe old Roman records would be brought out publicly, of a crucified man named Jesus of Nazareth, and the world would proclaim Him God?

Today, as many people are trying to exterminate Christ from Christmas and disprove the Bible, you think the world would take an unkown, crucified man and name Him God?

God can do all things, but my question is not concerning what God could do, but rather what if there was no Bible, meaning no revelation of Jesus Christ. God wouldn't allow this to happen, but we are speaking in the 'what if's.'

Too many people here and everywhere take the Bible for granted. They claim it is just another book, nothing very special about it other then some good teachings. Many here claim the words in the Bible aren't from God. This is most unfortunate, because your salvation rides on the fact that those words concerning Christ are truth in every sense of the word. You and I rely on the message of another, and we rely on the fact that it is ultimately from God.

I am rather amazed coming to a Christian forum where Christians dispute the Authority and Origin of the Bible itself. You would think this would be a fundamental belief amonst all Christians, that the Bible is from God, as it teaches.

As I have said, the flesh hates God. So the flesh will react and try to control the spirit to persuade that God's Word really isn't so. This is no different then the accounts of Adam and Eve. Satan tells Eve, God did really mean that did He? God didn't really say that did He? And Satan says today, God didn't really send that did He? God isn't really the author, but rather fallible men are responsible for the words therein. The Bible never did have its origins in God, did it? Satan works best when gets mankind to question what God has said, if He said, and did He mean what He said.

Your faith rests on the fact that the Bible is from God and is God's Word, and is infallible, innerant Word of God. If it is not then it has its origins in man. And man, in his carnal nature hates God. I would think twice before you or another tries to disprove the Bible in anyway, for you are only shooting yourself in the foot.

I, for one, specifically did not. I said:

I was responding to Tenacious-D, not you.

 

[MLML]

Not one of those verses is about the Bible.

Those verses are not about the bible either.

Of course not, if they were then you would have to admit the Bible is God's Word. Jesus is God's Living Word, the Bible is God's Written Word, in case you are confused. If you are having trouble believing the Bible is God's Word, then might I suggest you allow God out of the box you have put Him in?

 

[gluadys]

So then you believe that the whole world would know of Jesus Christ, His life, HIs death, His ressurection, and who He is, if the Bible was not present? I am not asking can God do it another way, because He is God and everything is possible for Him. I am asking if everything is the same, nothing changes other then the elimination of the Bible, you would know Christ as you know HIm now?

That wouldn't happen because God did choose to inspire the writing of scriptures. If God had not chosen to have the bible written and compiled under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, things would not have been the same.

God can do all things, but my question is not concerning what God could do, but rather what if there was no Bible, meaning no revelation of Jesus Christ. God wouldn't allow this to happen, but we are speaking in the 'what if's.'

The lack of a bible would not mean there was no revelation of Jesus Christ. It would mean the revelation was proclaimed by different means.

This is most unfortunate, because your salvation rides on the fact that those words concerning Christ are truth in every sense of the word.

This is just plain not true. Salvation rides on the grace of God in giving his Son to be our Redeemer. Nothing else. The words of the bible per se are not essential to salvation, however beautiful and helpful and useful they are in many respects. Salvation is a work of God, not of the bible. The bible contains the good news of God's saving work. But we are saved because God acted to save us; not because the bible is true.

I am rather amazed coming to a Christian forum where Christians dispute the Authority and Origin of the Bible itself. You would think this would be a fundamental belief amonst all Christians, that the Bible is from God, as it teaches.

It is indeed a fundamental truth that the bible is from God and you will not find me disputing its origin or authority. Only the authority of human interpretations of scripture.

I am continually amazed that those who claim to uphold the authority of scripture fail to read and heed its teachings on the sovereignty of God in all things and so come to attribute to this book the very actions of God.

Your faith rests on the fact that the Bible is from God and is God's Word, and is infallible, innerant Word of God.

Again, absolutely not. My faith rests in God and in God alone, and in his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. My faith in God does not rest on my faith in the bible. It is the other way around. My faith in the bible rests on my faith in God. It is precious to me, because it is a gift from God.

Are you saying that if you lost faith in the bible you would no longer have faith in God? Is your relationship to God that dependent on a book?

And you wonder why I call such a position dangerous?

 

[gluadys]

Of course not, if they were then you would have to admit the Bible is God's Word. Jesus is God's Living Word, the Bible is God's Written Word, in case you are confused. If you are having trouble believing the Bible is God's Word, then might I suggest you allow God out of the box you have put Him in?

I have no problem believing that the bible is God's Word. I do have a problem with people who misapply scripture to the written word of God when the reference is to the Living Creative Word of God which (as John tells us) was with God in the beginning and was God, and became incarnate among us as Jesus Christ.

The latter is not a description of the bible.

 

[MLML]

That wouldn't happen because God did choose to inspire the writing of scriptures. If God had not chosen to have the bible written and compiled under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, things would not have been the same.
The lack of a bible would not mean there was no revelation of Jesus Christ. It would mean the revelation was proclaimed by different means.

I guess you missed what I said, if things are the same today except the Bible never came to be, would you know who Christ is?

This is just plain not true. Salvation rides on the grace of God in giving his Son to be our Redeemer. Nothing else. The words of the bible per se are not essential to salvation, however beautiful and helpful and useful they are in many respects. Salvation is a work of God, not of the bible. The bible contains the good news of God's saving work. But we are saved because God acted to save us; not because the bible is true.

If you want to remain technical then so be it. Salvation resides in Christ and Christ alone. The Bible proclaims Christ, I have yet to see the secular world proclaim Christ as God, if they did, there would be no secular world.

The point I am making, which you don't want to hear it seems, is that the Bible is how we know of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the gate to God, there is no other way to God but through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is essential to Christian doctrine. The Bible is the only document that has been preserved to tell of Jesus Christ, who He is, and what He did. The Quran doesn't teach Christ is God, traditional Jewish people don't believe Jesus is God. Without the Bible, that so many take for granted, Jesus Christ wouldn't be proclaim by anyone.

God in His gracious mercy and will has made it so the Bible has remained. Are you aware of how many people have tried to exterminate the Bible throughout history? And yet it is still here, by God's Will not mans. There billions of people who try and prove the Bible wrong, yet Christianity has remained strong.

Why anyone today has so much pride in their thinking that they are the ones who will prove the Bible wrong, when countless people have already tried and failed is beyond me.

It is indeed a fundamental truth that the bible is from God and you will not find me disputing its origin or authority. Only the authority of human interpretations of scripture.

I assume you have heard of let scripture interpret scripture while the Holy Spirit leads it to be?

If we can get past our pride for a moment, and face fact, that someone here is wrong in their understanding of scripture; therefore they have allowed themselves to interpret rather than the Holy Spirit, we might all be more studious in the Bible.

I am continually amazed that those who claim to uphold the authority of scripture fail to read and heed its teachings on the sovereignty of God in all things and so come to attribute to this book the very actions of God.

John 20:29
"...blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

I believe this is what Jesus actually said. I believe the Bible came from God, not that God penned it Himself, but the words therein were given to men by the Holy Spirit to write what God wanted to be said.

Be amazed, because I uphold the Authority of God's Word, and I believe it is God's Word. I do not attribute the work therein of men, but of God.

Again, absolutely not. My faith rests in God and in God alone, and in his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. My faith in God does not rest on my faith in the bible. It is the other way around. My faith in the bible rests on my faith in God. It is precious to me, because it is a gift from God.

Your understanding of Jesus Christ came from the Bible. SHow me where the teachings of Jesus Christ, His work, His life, His death, His ressurection are recorded in something other than the Bible.

Are you saying that if you lost faith in the bible you would no longer have faith in God? Is your relationship to God that dependent on a book?

Are you judging my faith? Honestly, I don't mind that you are. I don't believe I have to answer to you about my faith, nor the other way around. But I am happy to answer your question.

Why would I lose faith in the Bible for one? My faith in the Bible is that its origins are in God, not man. That man didn't come up with the teachings therein, that man didn't decide what to write or what should be said, but it was God who guided it, who gave the words to say through inspiration to men.

It is remarkable how you often refer to the Bible as just a book. Nothing more, just another book on the shelves equal to Twain, Nietze, or Freud. My relationship dependent on a 'book'? Well, the 'book' is what teaches me to live a righteous life, it teaches me what Jesus Christ did so I can do my best to live as He. It tells me what God has done for His people, it tells me what happens at the end of all things. I would say it is no mere book, as you put it.

It is the 'book' that told me of Jesus Christ, it is then that Jesus Christ came to live in me because that 'book' told me about Him. I would say the 'book' is rather important, more important than any other book ever written.

And you wonder why I call such a position dangerous?

No, I don't wonder anymore. Flesh hates God.

 

[MLML]

I have no problem believing that the bible is God's Word. I do have a problem with people who misapply scripture to the written word of God when the reference is to the Living Creative Word of God which (as John tells us) was with God in the beginning and was God, and became incarnate among us as Jesus Christ.

The latter is not a description of the bible.

WHo here has said John 1:1 is a description of the Bible?

 

[Vance]

MLML, how did Christians become Christians for the first few hundred years before the New Testament Canon was put together? How were the first Christians converted without even a letter to work with?

The Bible is God's wonderful and miraculous message to us, and enhances our Christian lives immeasurably. AND, it can indeed lead many to salvation all by itself, since it CONTAINS the Word (Jesus), but that Word can also be spread without Scripture.

Now, I say this as one who lives and breathes Scripture. I have read and studied it all my life, and I could not imagine my life without being able to read and just wallow in it every day. I have it on audio and go to sleep listening to it nearly every night. So, I am not one who has little respect for God's Holy Scripture.

 

[gluadys]

I guess you missed what I said, if things are the same today except the Bible never came to be, would you know who Christ is?

No, I didn't miss what you said. I explained that this scenario would never occur, since God would find a way to have the gospel proclaimed in any case.

If you want to remain technical then so be it. Salvation resides in Christ and Christ alone. The Bible proclaims Christ, I have yet to see the secular world proclaim Christ as God, if they did, there would be no secular world.

I think it is much more important than a mere technical point.

The point I am making, which you don't want to hear it seems, is that the Bible is how we know of Jesus Christ.

It is one way we know Jesus Christ. But we also know Jesus Christ personally. We also know Jesus Christ through the testimony of the Holy Spirit. We also know Jesus Christ through the testimony of the church. We also know Jesus Christ through Christ-like fellow Christians and through their witness. The bible is immensely important. But God is in no way dependant on the bible to bring us to Christ or to inform us about Christ.

Destroy every bible in the world tomorrow and God's message of salvation will still be heard.

Jesus Christ is the gate to God, there is no other way to God but through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is essential to Christian doctrine. The Bible is the only document that has been preserved to tell of Jesus Christ, who He is, and what He did.

Granted to this point. That is what makes the bible the treasure it is.

Without the Bible, that so many take for granted, Jesus Christ wouldn't be proclaim by anyone.

But this I do not grant. Jesus Christ would continue to be proclaimed by Christians around the world. God would see to it that the message of salvation is not lost.

If we can get past our pride for a moment, and face fact, that someone here is wrong in their understanding of scripture; therefore they have allowed themselves to interpret rather than the Holy Spirit, we might all be more studious in the Bible.

Amen. And one of the things we will find is that the bible testifies of God and of Jesus Christ, not of itself. Even the passages in the bible that refer to the Word of God are not references to the bible.

Your understanding of Jesus Christ came from the Bible. SHow me where the teachings of Jesus Christ, His work, His life, His death, His ressurection are recorded in something other than the Bible.

They are recorded in the hearts of all who know him by the Holy Spirit.

Are you judging my faith? Honestly, I don't mind that you are.

I hope not. I am asking a question. And you don't have to answer me. But I hope you ask it of yourself and answer to yourself and to God.

It is remarkable how you often refer to the Bible as just a book. Nothing more, just another book on the shelves equal to Twain, Nietze, or Freud.

No,not "just another book". I think I have made it clear that the bible is a unique book and priceless beyond all measure to a Christian. I come from a Sola Scriptura tradition, so a high view of scripture is important to me. But when all is said and done, the bible is still a book, not a deity.

My relationship dependent on a 'book'? Well, the 'book' is what teaches me to live a righteous life, it teaches me what Jesus Christ did so I can do my best to live as He. It tells me what God has done for His people, it tells me what happens at the end of all things. I would say it is no mere book, as you put it.

It is the 'book' that told me of Jesus Christ, it is then that Jesus Christ came to live in me because that 'book' told me about Him. I would say the 'book' is rather important, more important than any other book ever written.

All you are saying about the book is true. The question remains, now that Jesus Christ has come to live in you, is your relationship to the bible or to Jesus?

As I see it, the bible is, in some ways, like the Torah--the law. Paul says of the Torah that it was a teacher to lead us to Christ. But having come to Christ, it is no longer needed as a teacher--at least not in that respect. Yet we still read and value the Torah and indeed the whole bible.

Martin Luther once said of the bible that it is the cradle of Christ. The bible has brought many to Christ, and it is right to honour it for its role in converting the sinner and in teaching the believer the way of righteousness.

But the centre of the Christian faith must remain Christ--not his cradle.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

WHo here has said John 1:1 is a description of the Bible?

You'd be surprised. It comes up from time to time.

More accurately, what happens is that folk say that John 1:1 is a description of Jesus, but because He is called "The Word", Jesus and the Bible are effectively the same thing.

 

[TwinCrier]

Back to the topic, let's see about this whole pseudo-science accusation:
Next time you read a 'science' article, pay close attention to how often they use phrases such as may have been, if it occurred, might have been, unexplained, speculation about actual events, suggest, possible outcomes, no evidence, probably, conceivable, might have been (my personal favorite), we now suspect, might have, could have, perhaps, but, or, no way of proving, etc, etc, etc. Scientists sure don't seem all that sure of anything, so I would caution putting faith in their observations over those of men lead my the Holy Spirit of God. It's often repeated here that origins belief isn't a salvation issue, and I hope for the sake of many, that you are right.
Let's all hope and pray the gospels aren't an allegory. Let's pray we're not judged by what be put our faith in, and let's pray that someday Karl changes the irritated smilie under his name to something more pleasant. Amen.

And Father in Heaven, please soften the hearts of those who seek you to not be blinded by the science of men but to be drawn to the truth of thy holy word. Restrain the powers of darkness that suuround them that they may see the light of truth. In Jesus name, amen.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Back to the topic, let's see about this whole pseudo-science accusation:
Next time you read a 'science' article, pay close attention to how often they use phrases such as may have been, if it occurred, might have been, unexplained, speculation about actual events, suggest, possible outcomes, no evidence, probably, conceivable, might have been (my personal favorite), we now suspect, might have, could have, perhaps, but, or, no way of proving, etc, etc, etc. Scientists sure don't seem all that sure of anything, so I would caution putting faith in their observations over those of men lead my the Holy Spirit of God.

I look at this an I say that I am glad that scientists are honest about their uncertainty because science isn't supposed to be dogmatic. It is about trying to observe data as objectively as possible and coming up with the most plausible explanation for that data as devoid of personal bias as possible. A good scientist will use uncertain language because they know that their theories are not proofs and that it is impossible to completely remove personal bias from their theories. But unlike "Creation Scientists" they try.

 

[gluadys]

I look at this an I say that I am glad that scientists are honest about their uncertainty because science isn't supposed to be dogmatic. It is about trying to observe data as objectively as possible and coming up with the most plausible explanation for that data as devoid of personal bias as possible. A good scientist will use uncertain language because they know that their theories are not proofs and that it is impossible to completely remove personal bias from their theories. But unlike "Creation Scientists" they try.

Right. Science is always provisional and so scientific papers use appropriately provisional language.

 

[grmorton]

I look at this an I say that I am glad that scientists are honest about their uncertainty because science isn't supposed to be dogmatic. It is about trying to observe data as objectively as possible and coming up with the most plausible explanation for that data as devoid of personal bias as possible. A good scientist will use uncertain language because they know that their theories are not proofs and that it is impossible to completely remove personal bias from their theories. But unlike "Creation Scientists" they try.

There is a more important distinction. With science it is possible to categorically state what ISN"T the case, but it is impossible to prove what is the case. I can categorically state the the sky is not pink with purple polkadots. I can categorically state that electricity does not obey a law V=Ir^3, but I can't prove that it always followed V=ir. It obeys it within experimental error for all observed situations, but that doesn't mean that the law is proven.