day = indeterminate time?

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

The plain intent of Scripture is that the word 'day' means one rotation of the earth's sphere. The only reason people seek an alternative meaning is because they do not accept the plain intent of Scripture. Rather, they elevate man's theories, in this case evolution, above God's truth.

The logic of liberals goes something like this:

Evolution of man from slime is a scientific truth
The plain teaching of God's word teaches the world as created in six days.
Since evolution is true, God's word is wrong.
Assume that God didn't really mean what He said, and read into the passage anything you like by assuming it was all intended as allegory, or myth.

The fault here is disbelief. Since Christians walk by faith, doubting God's truth is always dangerous.

The Christian view of Genesis is as follows:

God's word is truth.
Genesis plainly teaches that God created the world in six days.
The theory of evolution assumes millions of years were required for man to evolve.
That contradicts the plain teaching of Scripture, and is therefore wrong.

Note that there is an ever increasing body of evidence to show that evolution is little more than the vain and proud imaginations of fallen humanity that seeks to live independently from God.

[Information Request]

Is it really the view of YECs that (as apparently assumed by the wording of this post):

1) Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to Christian ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word is Wrong"
4) The only "Christian" view is the YEC one?

[/Information Request]

[Unsolicited Correction]

Firstly, can I state that the "liberal" thought process described above does not accurately represent what any "liberal" (or theistic evolutionist) I know of thinks?

By all means disagree with us - that's what this forum's for, but I'm sure no-one wants it to be a place where misrepresentations of the other side are freely propogated.

Secondly:

Note that there is an ever increasing body of evidence to show that evolution is little more than the vain and proud imaginations of fallen humanity that seeks to live independently from God.

There is no such body of evidence. This statement is simply false.

[/Unsolicited Correction]

 

[Bonhoffer]

[Information Request]

Is it really the view of YECs that (as apparently assumed by the wording of this post):

1) Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to Christian ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word is Wrong"
4) The only "Christian" view is the YEC one?

Theistic evolutionists tend to be liberals, but I have met some very conservative TEs as well. However how many liberal theologians have you met who are YEC's? the TE position is a liberal, although TE's may only be liberal on the creation story and not on other parts. i.e a TE may beleive in the parting of the Rea Sea and even Joshuas long day!

 

[Micaiah]

[Information Request]

Is it really the view of YECs that (as apparently assumed by the wording of this post):

1) Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to Christian ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word is Wrong"
4) The only "Christian" view is the YEC one?

[/Information Request]

[Unsolicited Correction]

Firstly, can I state that the "liberal" thought process described above does not accurately represent what any "liberal" (or theistic evolutionist) I know of thinks?

By all means disagree with us - that's what this forum's for, but I'm sure no-one wants it to be a place where misrepresentations of the other side are freely propogated.

Secondly:

There is no such body of evidence. This statement is simply false.

[/Unsolicited Correction]

Okay, I'll change that to 'liberals who are TE's'. I haven't met too many YEC's, but I'm prepared to stand corrected on that if one comes forward. Seems to me that liberal theology and TE go hand in hand.

As your second statement is simply wrong, why should we believe your first!

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

No, it's more that there are plenty of TEs who are theological conservatives, than that there are liberal YECs.

I'm afraid my second statement is not false. Of course, I can't debate the evidence here, but for the original statement (that there is a large body of evidence that evolution is false) to be true, the vast amounts of supporting evidence for evolution would have to be shown to be incorrect. This has not happened; there is therefore no credible evidence (much less a "large body of evidence") that evolution is false, thus the statement that there is is false, and ipso facto my statement is true.

The other reason you should accept my first statement even if not my second is that to reject it, you must accuse me of lying about my thought processes. Do you really want to go there, even in your creationist safe haven?

 

[Micaiah]

No, it's more that there are plenty of TEs who are theological conservatives, than that there are liberal YECs.

I'm afraid my second statement is not false. Of course, I can't debate the evidence here, but for the original statement (that there is a large body of evidence that evolution is false) to be true, the vast amounts of supporting evidence for evolution would have to be shown to be incorrect. This has not happened; there is therefore no credible evidence (much less a "large body of evidence") that evolution is false, thus the statement that there is is false, and ipso facto my statement is true.

The other reason you should accept my first statement even if not my second is that to reject it, you must accuse me of lying about my thought processes. Do you really want to go there, even in your creationist safe haven?

I prefer words like deceived or deluded to lying. How about you?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Not the point.

You have said "liberals think like this"

I have said "I'm a liberal and I don't think like that".

"Deluded or deceived" doesn't really come into it. There is a discrepancy between how I claim I think, and how you claim I think. So, either I'm lying, or you're wrong about how I think.

Which is it?

 

[Micaiah]

I understand that is what you think. Those who are deceived and deluded frequently do not like to admit it, and by definition, rarely know.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Of course, I can't debate the evidence here, but for the original statement (that there is a large body of evidence that evolution is false) to be true, the vast amounts of supporting evidence for evolution would have to be shown to be incorrect. This has not happened; there is therefore no credible evidence (much less a "large body of evidence") that evolution is false, thus the statement that there is is false, and ipso facto my statement is true.

Sounds like your debating to me. That being said there is no evidence for evolution. We see no working mechanisms that would change 1 cell organisms to human life even if given billions of years. We see plenty of examples where animals lose information and are told that is evolution in action but evolution is suppose to be a gaining information, not losing. Also, we are given God's word telling us the animals will only bring forth after their kind. It's very clear that this goes against evolution as well. Behe has shown in his book, Darwin's Black Box, there are many examples in biology of things that could not have been brought about by evolution. Evolution is a bankrupt idea that should go into the same book as the idea that many people held not so long ago that draining blood from someone would cure them.

 

[Micaiah]

I'd agree with that P76, sorry P86. Coming here claiming there is no evidence to support the plain truth taught in Scripture that the world was created in six days, doesn't really sound like the kind of comment you'd expect from a 'Creationist'. For a minute there I thought that 'Karl the Liberal Backslider' had a change of heart, and decided to recant on his TE beliefs. He seems to spend an awful lot of time in these parts.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

I came to ask for clarification. Couldn't resist pointing out a simple factual error.

I'm still not sure where we are, Micaiah. Are you saying that I actually think the way you say I do, but I'm deluded into thinking I think the way I think I think?

In which case you've found a way out, but it's a pity you can't do it without arrogant statements about the state of my mental clarity. Shame.

 

[TwinCrier]

When we talk about a day, don't we normally start with morning and end with evening?

Why does the Bible use it in reverse order?

Who is "we" and what is "normal?" The Jewish culture starts their day at sunset and WQestern culture starts the day at midnight.

 

[TwinCrier]

[Information Request]

Is it really the view of YECs that (as apparently assumed by the wording of this post):

1) Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to Christian ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word is Wrong"
4) The only "Christian" view is the YEC one?

[/Information Request]

1) MOST Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to BIBLICAL ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word NEEDS THEIR INTERPRETATION"
4) The only "BIBLICAL" view is the YEC one?
Now I know not all who call themselves Christian believe the bible, but for those of use who do, the bible carries weight in out beliefs.

 

[Micaiah]

I came to ask for clarification. Couldn't resist pointing out a simple factual error.

I'm still not sure where we are, Micaiah. Are you saying that I actually think the way you say I do, but I'm deluded into thinking I think the way I think I think?

In which case you've found a way out, but it's a pity you can't do it without arrogant statements about the state of my mental clarity. Shame.

To come into a 'Creationist' forum and attempt to 'clarify' the situation by claiming the plain teaching of Genesis is not factual shows an audacity, arrogance, and confusion that is what we've come to expect.

I thought I'd made myself perfectly clear the first time. I'll say it again. In order to avoid confusion, I'd ask that you avoid looking for allegorical messages in what is intended as a plain statement of fact. Your TE interpretation of Genesis is wrong, and you are deceived thinking it is the truth. I trust that is now clear.

 

[Micaiah]

1) MOST Theistic evolutionists are liberals
2) Liberal views stand in opposition to BIBLICAL ones
3) "Liberals"/TEs say that "God's Word NEEDS THEIR INTERPRETATION"
4) The only "BIBLICAL" view is the YEC one?
Now I know not all who call themselves Christian believe the bible, but for those of use who do, the bible carries weight in out beliefs.

You have answered clearly and plainly in a way that only those who believe an intended message can be conveyed plainly and clearly can. Thankyou.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Matter dropped.

 

[Vance]

This post deleted at the request of a mod, based on a complaint from a Creationist. The post itself, as well as the one to which it responded, can now be found here:

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=9186506#post9186506

 

[mhess13]

So I thought this was a forum for creationists to hang out and talk. How come the TE's come over here and debate? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a creationist forum? Can't the YECs have anyplace to hang out and talk w/out having to deal with the scoffers???????????

 

[TwinCrier]

Sure, you just have to report the offending posts with that handy "report" button at the corner of each post and the moderators will remove the offending post and scold the poster.

 

[mhess13]

Sure, you just have to report the offending posts with that handy "report" button at the corner of each post and the moderators will remove the offending post and scold the poster.

I know, I just hate to do that. The TEs always used to whine to the mods and get me in trouble and I hate to be a taddle tale like them...

 

[mhess13]

[notroll]