Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons...?

[sealacamp]

The solution is to teach our young people an interpretation of the Bible that is academically defensible

So again you say that we must reinterpret the bible to coincide with some current academic view. Those views you hold for one thing are not all academic views rather they are the ones you accept and adhere to. For another thing we should teach the truth no matter who agrees or disagrees with it, period. Young or old for me is irrelevant, what is relevant is that God created all that there is and many current "academic views" extrapolate upon the theory of evolution to the point that it is used to represent creation itself, a creation with out God or purpose. This has been pointed out to you several times here in this thread yet you rejected them. Many people here have tried to actually reason with you so that hopefully you can see that there is some error in your view. And now you are saying that we must conform an interpretation of the bible to current academic views, do you have any idea how erroneous that is? No one can reason with you because you have your mind made up already so that nothing that is said to you, no matter how reasonable it may be, will be entertained by you at all. Frankly I hope that God will lead you into His truth and then you will be free to be His and not the slave of the "current academic view."

Sealacamp

 

[phoenixdem]

"I believe the Bible, every word of it, but I do not believe your interpretation"

This is one king-size rationalization.

"I am one of hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of conservative, evangelical Christians today who believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not an accurate account of historic events. "

Do you think there is strength in numbers for those who disbelieve the Holy Bible? God has always worked with a remnant of believers. It really isn't safe to depend on a large number of people, the wise and the well-educated. God is not impressed wih degrees and He delights in making foolish the wisdom of this world. God looks upon the heart and judges man using His own standards that have little to do with college degrees.

"the Bible will still be seen to contradict the fact that the earth is, at the very least, hundreds of millions of years old. Therefore, our young people (not only our Christian young people) will continue to reject the Bible as a reliable source of truth.

The Holy Bible will always be rejected by those who are enemies of God amd the gospel. It is more important what is in the heart than what is in a person's head. Do you think that God would prefer a full church of people who don't really believe Him and thinks His gospel is a lie, or a small number of people who are faithful to Him and depend on Him for guidance and His love? God would much prefer quality over quantity. God knows His own and He will take care of His sheep, the goats will be separated from Him and eternal life.

If you go through the New Testament, you will see that the NT books frequently make reference to the Old Testament, even Jesus refers to the Old Testament. The New Testament rests upon the Old Testament. If you succeed in tearing down the roots of Christianity, what would be the difference in what Judas tried to do?

It's your call. You will do what you have to do. The important thing is what God will have to do.

 

[joshua41]

I do not see why this is such a divisive issue. I do not see why both sides can't acknowledge each other's point of view. There are much more important issues.

Is this something worth spending energy on?

 

[phoenixdem]

I do not see why this is such a divisive issue. I do not see why both sides can't acknowledge each other's point of view. There are much more important issues.

Is this something worth spending energy on?

Yes, yes, and again yes. You are talking compromise and that is something that Christians cannot do and still call themself children of God.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and

murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all
liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and​

brimstone: which is the second death.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

I'm glad you hold some conservative principles. This to me is confirmation that the sole reason you believe in evolution is because your education and field are in science. You cannot separate them and look objectively at scripture by simple dependence on the Holy Spirit's enlightenment.

I know you can't see but wish you could, that homosexuals do the same thing with such passages as Romans 1 as you have attempted to do with Genesis. The same basic philosophy. This dichotomy in your life cannot last long. I suspect that in your near future will be a continued "evolution" of your theology; for there is no difference in what you are doing with Genesis and such people as Ollie Franz attempted to do with passages like Romans 1. Even if you maintain this dichotomy and argue that it is consistent and defensible, young people - and even your children - will be able to see through the inconsistency if not hypocrisy of it.

Please do not misrepresent the facts. I posted in this thread the following information about myself:

Don Quixote was an irrational, delusional romantic. I am just the opposite—blessed by God with an excellent education in evolutionary biology, and subsequently in New Testament exegesis and translation theory with a smattering of Old and New Testament theology. The Book of Genesis is, by far, my favorite book in the Old Testament, and in my leisure time I enjoy studying it. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans has fascinated me from my earliest days as a Christian, and I have in my personal library 239 commentaries (representing an extremely wide spectrum of theological thought and opinion) on that epistle, eleven additional volumes treating subjects regarding Paul’s Epistle to the Romans that are usually not treated in depth in commentaries, and about 50 volumes on Paul’s theology. Therefore, I am very familiar with the fall of man as portrayed in Genesis, the theological implications of the fall, and Paul’s purpose in using the story of the fall of man in Genesis.
​

Robert A. J. Gagnon, in his book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice http://www.christianbook.com/the-bible-and-homosexual-practice/robert-gagnon/9780687022793/pd/022797 , discusses the interpretation of Romans 1:18-32, 1 Cor. 6:9, and 1 Tim. 1:10 by homosexuals who teach from the Greek New Testament that the historical and traditional interpretation of these passages severely misses the mark. In my private library, I have several early exegetical commentaries on the Greek text of Romans, and all of them from 1842 (Tholuck, first American edition) down to the present day (Schreiner, 1998). Not even one of these commentaries lends the slightest bit of credence to the teaching of the homosexuals. All of these commentaries, without a single exception, favor the historical and traditional interpretation of Romans 1:18-32 that the practice of homosexual acts is a sin, regardless of the exact nature of the acts and regardless of any long-term relationship between the participants. Furthermore, I have in my personal library many highly detailed lexical studies by scholars known around the world for their academic excellence in the field of Greek lexicography and the vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, and all of them, without a single exception, favor the historical and traditional interpretation of the words in the Greek New Testament that have traditionally been translated using words depicting persons engaged in homosexual acts.

When we look, however, at the recent exegetical commentaries on the Hebrew text of Genesis, we find that not even one of them favors the historical and traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-11. Indeed, they not only do not favor it, they nearly ignore it in the light of the past 200 years of research into the Hebrew text of Genesis that proves that the historical and traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-11 is academically indefensible.

In order for any interpretation of the Bible and its parts to be correct, it MUST be in harmony with all of the relevant data—including the relevant data from science. As I have already posted in this thread, information from science has caused the interpretation of the “flat earth” passages in the Bible to be reinterpreted, and today, many readers of the Bible are not aware of how these passages were interpreted before the shape of the earth was established by science. The very same thing is true of the geocentric passages in the Bible. Even the interpretation of the Greek words that in our English Bibles are translated as “cross,” “crucify,” and “tree” is based upon secular sources, including the sciences of archaeology and Christian epigraphy. Numerous other examples could be cited, including the interpretation of the wound of Jesus by the spear into his side (John 19:34) and the identity of the numerous kinds of plants and animals mentioned in the Old Testament. Bernard Ramm, B.D., Ph.D., in his now classical work, Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook of Hermeneutics for Conservative Protestants, devotes an entire chapter to the role of science in biblical hermeneutics.

The story of Noah’s Ark in Genesis 6-9 describes an absolutely impossible scenario—impossible because the scenario contradicts what is factually known from numerous branches of science. Anyone who chooses to ignore this factual information in the process of interpreting the Bible is not really interpreting the Bible—he is making the Bible appear to mean what it does not does not mean. Indeed, Milton S. Terry, S.T.D., in his Biblical Hermeneutics. A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments (New Edition, thoroughly revised in 1890, published by Easton & Mains as a volume in the Library of Biblical and Theological Literature), writes on page 404:

It is the province of the interpreter of Scripture to examine these [discrepancies] with great patience and care; he must not ignore any difficulty, but should be able to explain the apparent inconsistencies, not by dogmatic assertions or denials, but by rational methods of procedure. If he finds a discrepancy or a contradiction which he is unable to explain he should not hesitate to acknowledge it.
​

Terry wrote these sentences in reference to apparent inconsistencies in the Bible itself, and not between the Bible and science, but inconsistencies of all kinds deserve the same treatment.

Some people have a heart-felt desire to learn the truth, not in laziness or slothfulness, but at great financial expense and by way of a lifetime of arduous study and countless hours on their knees before God, without regard to whether they will like the truth; some other people hastily and recklessly presume that which they wish to be the truth is the truth, when in fact it is not. In both my secular and my religious education, I learned some things that I did not like, but God does not ask us to like the truth—he asks to learn the truth and live our lives accordingly. Indeed, the truth, when learned and believed, is powerful.

John 8:31. So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;
32. and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
33. They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?”
34. Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.
35. “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.
36. “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” (NASB, 1995)

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Hi PG,

You wrote:

The theory that the earth is no more than about 10,000 years old is seen as ridiculous by a rapidly growing portion of young people today, and even if the theory of evolution (the theory that all plants and animals alive today evolved through the process of natural selection from a very simple, sub-cellular life form) should eventually be abandoned by every one of the few million scientists who believe it today, the Bible will still be seen to contradict the fact that the earth is, at the very least, hundreds of millions of years old. Therefore, our young people (not only our Christian young people) will continue to reject the Bible as a reliable source of truth.

I'm curious, have you ever read the Scriptures and sought the leading of God's Holy Spirit as your teacher or just as another well read work of man's writings that have come down over the centuries.

I ask because you seem to make claims that would deny any faith in what God's word tells us.

At the time that I accepted Christ as my savior, I was attending the Sunday morning and evening services at an Assembly of God Church and midweek Bible studies at a Baptist coffee house. The beliefs of the Assembly of God Christians and the Baptist Christians differed on a few doctrinal issues that I believed to be important. My formal education up to that point in my life was in the science of evolutionary biology so I had been very thoroughly taught to think critically and analytically and to never jump to conclusions. Indeed, for a scientist to jump to conclusions, as some have, is to destroy ones career.

Therefore, when I gave my life to Christ, I had an insatiable desire to know what the Bible really teaches concerning the doctrinal issues over which the Assemblies of God and the Baptists are divided. This desire brought me before God on my knees as I prayed to Him to teach me His truths and to protect me from doctrinal error. Throughout my life since then, that has continued to be my prayer every time that I read the Bible, hear it preached or taught, every time I open a devotional book or a commentary of the Hebrew text of Genesis, and as I go for hikes in the backcountry with God as my only companion.

I do not have any faith at all in what you or any other people tell me “God’s word tells us” when I and many others have read the same “word” very many times and I know that it says no such thing. This is especially true when I have spent very many hours studying a passage in the original language and have compared what God has shown me in the passage with what God has shown others who have also very carefully studied it in the original language. This is all the more true when biblical scholars who have invested a large portion of their lives studying, in the original language, the same book of the Bible that I am studying and they interpret it in the same manner that I believe that God has shown me to be correct.

Twice, but only twice, in my life as a Christian, God has spoken to me in a distinctly supernatural manner. The first instance occurred when I had been a Christian for just a few months. That evening, I had had a conversation with Christian man about one of the doctrines taught by both my Assemblies of God pastor and the teachers at the Baptist coffee house, and he told me that the doctrine was not true. I insisted that it was, and he asked me where in the Bible it is taught. I had learned from both my pastor and the teachers at the Baptist coffee house the scriptural basis of the doctrine, but I could not remember where the verses were or the exact wording of them. Therefore, the man told me to go home and study the doctrine and meet with him the following evening.

I went home, opened up my New Scofield Reference Bible, and began reading all of Scofield’s notes on the doctrine. I wanted to find some really good proof texts, but I could not find any. Therefore, I earnestly prayed to God for His help in my study of the Bible that night. I continued to study, and the more that I studied, the more that I prayed because I was not finding anything even close to a proof text. Indeed, it was beginning to appear to me that the doctrine that I was attempting to find proof texts for was not in the Bible. Scofield thought that it was, and I read the verses that he believed proved the doctrine to be true, but I saw that they did not teach it at all. I continued to pray and study and God spoke to me and told me that the doctrine is not true, and told me what the Bible really teaches on the matter.

Having been a Christian for only a few months, and realizing that both my pastor and the teachers at the Baptist coffee house were teaching a very false doctrine, I became very discouraged and wondered what else I had been taught that was not true. It was getting late, and I was very upset, so I poured my heart out to God and asked Him to “help me!” He reminded me of a book that I had—an analysis of the doctrines of the Assembles of God—and I looked through it and saw that it said nothing about that doctrine. Now, I was even more discouraged—I thought that God had reminded me of that book, but the book was of no help. I poured my heart out to God and asked Him to “help me, please!” God spoke to me again and rebuked me for doubting Him and told me to take a closer look at the book. I thought to myself, “Yeah, right!”, but I took a closer look at the book and noticed an asterisk that I had overlooked. The asterisk took me to a note in the appendix in which it said that pastors in the Assemblies of God differ regarding that doctrine—some believing and teaching it, and others not. At that moment, I realized that God had taught me something that my pastor and the teachers in the Baptist coffee house did not know. I said a brief but heart-felt prayer of thanks to God, went to bed, and slept in perfect peace.

Having been educated as a scientist, I had an irresistible desire to find out why my pastor and the teachers at the Baptist coffee house could not understand what to me now was so very clearly taught in the Bible. This desire led me into a study of the history of the interpretation of the New Testament.

The second instance occurred when I had been a Christian for three years and I was teaching a one-year-long Bible study at my church on Paul’s Epistle to Romans. As I was studying chapter six, it appeared to me that Paul was saying something very different than what he said later in chapter 7:14-25, and that my understanding of chapter 7:14-25 was possibly incorrect. Therefore, I earnestly prayed to God for Him to make the matter clear to me. This time, He told me the correct interpretation of chapter 7:14-25—an interpretation very different from what I had been taught and believed to be true.

I had at the time, thirteen commentaries on the English translation of Romans, and I read what all thirteen of them had to say on that passage. Twelve of them taught the same thing that I had been taught for three years; the remaining commentary was non-committal. Therefore, I prayed again, and asked God if it was really He who had spoken to me. He told me that it was, and told me to believe Him rather than men when there is a disagreement.

Having been educated as a scientist, I had an irresistible desire to find out who else believed as I now did, and why the others believed differently. Today, I have 239 commentaries on Romans, and I now know very many of the factors that have caused the interpreters of chapter 7:14-25 to interpret it as they have. It is comforting to me to know now that in the academic world, the most common interpretation of that passage is the interpretation that God gave to me, and that He gave the same interpretation to some other faithful believers throughout the history of the Church.


Most of the time, however, as I read and study the Bible, praying earnestly to God for Him to teach me His truths, He brings the truth to my attention in a more subtle manner. There are, however, several areas of doctrine that I am still waiting for God to make clear to me.

 

[miamited]

Hi PG,

Well, I'm willing to now allow Him to do that.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi again PG,

I've been considering all that you have written and I am amazed, and had completely forgotten all about your list of credentials when I asked how you read God's word. So, now that I know that you have deeply studied let me then work under the assumption that you know the truth and I don't.

Was Adam a real live breathing individual and was he the first 'man'?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[phoenixdem]

PQ,

I want to know if I understood you correctly.

You are saying that God told you mankind evolved from a lower form of life?

God also told you that mankind has misunderstood the Holy Scriptures and that you now know the deeper meaning of Scriptures as God reveals them to you?

That deeper understanding involves mankind totally rejecting the first eleven chapters of Genesis and other Scripture as Science reveals that Scripture to be false?

 

[joshua41]

PhoenixDem

Please show me where Princeton Guy has said the scriptures were false. Please show me where he said Genesis didn't apply. Please show me where someone has said, mankind doesn't have a fallen nature; Jesus didn't exist.

Quite simply, his main argument the way I am interpreting it is this: The principles of the stories are factual and should be interpreted like modern day Baptists interpret them; however, the stories themselves are not actual events and were meant to be metaphors.

I can't see how or why you think he is trying to destroy the Bible.

 

[miamited]

Hi Joshua,

If I might interject here. Let me ask you to do a favor for me. Don't bother to respond, but I'd ask you to first pray for God's wisdom. Then find a chair in a quiet place where you might have 10 or 15 minutes of privacy. Then I'd like you to consider the difference that would come about in our understanding of the glory and majesty of God under both scenarios.

In other words, I'm asking you to just sit quietly and rationalize within your own mind, work out the problem so to speak between how one would see a God who is certainly a powerful and mighty God, but instead of making everthing complete and perfect at the beginning might compare in nature to a God who, in a matter of just hours created everything in the entire universe from the most distant star of one end to the most distant star of the other, and everything was created working and in proper order perfectly. No mock up. No, well let's see how this works out. But rather created perfectly in the time and scope that the Genesis account would allow if taken literally.

Would there be any difference at all in the power, majesty, glory and wisdom of the two Gods?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[phoenixdem]

PhoenixDem

Please show me where Princeton Guy has said the scriptures were false. Please show me where he said Genesis didn't apply. Please show me where someone has said, mankind doesn't have a fallen nature; Jesus didn't exist.

Quite simply, his main argument the way I am interpreting it is this: The principles of the stories are factual and should be interpreted like modern day Baptists interpret them; however, the stories themselves are not actual events and were meant to be metaphors.

I can't see how or why you think he is trying to destroy the Bible.

Let's allow PQ to answer for himself, shall we?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

PQ,

I want to know if I understood you correctly.

You are saying that God told you mankind evolved from a lower form of life?

God also told you that mankind has misunderstood the Holy Scriptures and that you now know the deeper meaning of Scriptures as God reveals them to you?

That deeper understanding involves mankind totally rejecting the first eleven chapters of Genesis and other Scripture as Science reveals that Scripture to be false?

Are you willfully, deliberately, and maliciously misrepresenting what I have posted, or are you continuing to confuse what others have posted for what I have posted? I have repeatedly said in this thread that I do not believe that man evolved from a lower form of life. I have told you what God told me, and yet you are falsely making it appear that I said something very different. I do not understand or comprehend how any human being could possibly be so disrespectful of another human being. If I did believe that man evolved from a lower form of life, would it not be logical for me to suppose that “people” who behave in such a non-human manner are species of a lower form of life?

 

[sealacamp]

I do not understand or comprehend how any human being could possibly be so disrespectful of another human being.

Neither do I, but that is exactly what you are doing when you reject the first 11 chapters of Genesis in lieu of your "interpretation that can be defended." Who knows what else you want to change to make it defensible? Consider that for a moment will you? BTW the bible doesn't need to be defended, nor does God, nor does Christ, they can defend themselves quite well on their own as they have done from the beginning of time, consider that as well. And please consider that many people have found your premise offensive thus the many many comments trying to bring you down to earth, consider that.

Thanks

Sealacamp

 

[phoenixdem]

Are you willfully, deliberately, and maliciously misrepresenting what I have posted, or are you continuing to confuse what others have posted for what I have posted? I have repeatedly said in this thread that I do not believe that man evolved from a lower form of life. I have told you what God told me, and yet you are falsely making it appear that I said something very different. I do not understand or comprehend how any human being could possibly be so disrespectful of another human being. If I did believe that man evolved from a lower form of life, would it not be logical for me to suppose that “people” who behave in such a non-human manner are species of a lower form of life?

Perhaps you missed this sentence at the beginning of my post?

"I want to know if I understood you correctly."

Since when it is being disrepectful to check perceptions of what you said? Isn't communication something that people with higher degrees can do? I had to take speech class and quite a few classes in English. I was required to do research on various things and write reports on what I found.

I haven't read what you said about what God told you. If you are talking about your post above, it was a bit vague. Ambiguity was partly why I asked you those questions. You referred to some verses in Romans without really stating what you learned from God. You said that your perception of Scripture, or at least some verses, was something of a source of pride since many other people believed the same thing. It seemed to be more advanced than what others think.

What does evolution mean to you since you don't think that mankind evolved from a lower form of life since evolution does involve just that?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Hi Joshua,

If I might interject here. Let me ask you to do a favor for me. Don't bother to respond, but I'd ask you to first pray for God's wisdom. Then find a chair in a quiet place where you might have 10 or 15 minutes of privacy. Then I'd like you to consider the difference that would come about in our understanding of the glory and majesty of God under both scenarios.

In other words, I'm asking you to just sit quietly and rationalize within your own mind, work out the problem so to speak between how one would see a God who is certainly a powerful and mighty God, but instead of making everthing complete and perfect at the beginning might compare in nature to a God who, in a matter of just hours created everything in the entire universe from the most distant star of one end to the most distant star of the other, and everything was created working and in proper order perfectly. No mock up. No, well let's see how this works out. But rather created perfectly in the time and scope that the Genesis account would allow if taken literally.

Would there be any difference at all in the power, majesty, glory and wisdom of the two Gods?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Hi Ted,

If I might interject here, let me ask you a question. Do you have any idea how insulting and demeaning it is for you to suggest that Christians who disagree with you have not spent even 10 or 15 minutes contemplating the things of which you wrote—but with very different results? God and His majesty, glory, and power are infinite, and believing what He has shown us about his creation through the creation itself does not in any way diminish who God is or how we perceive Him.

Romans 1:18. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19. because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (NASB, 1995)

I enjoy hiking in the backcountry with God as my only companion, conversing with Him, and contemplating His majesty, glory, and power as I focus my eyes upon his creation and marvel at its beauty and magnificence—knowing that He created it all as a testimony to whom He is that I and others might learn of Him. Whether God created it all in a tiny fraction of a nanosecond, in six days, or over a span of billions of years does not change who God is, but knowing that the earth that I am walking upon with its flora and fauna is the very expression of what God has been in the process of doing for billions of years thrills my soul!

How Great Thou Art


O Lord my God,
When I in awesome wonder
Consider all
The works Thy Hand hath made,
I see the stars,
I hear the mighty thunder,
Thy pow'r throughout
The universe displayed;


When through the woods
And forest glades I wander
I hear the birds
Sing sweetly in the trees;
When I look down
From lofty mountain grandeur
And hear the brook
And feel the gentle breeze;


Then sings my soul,
My Saviour God, to Thee,
How great Thou art!
How great Thou art!
Then sings my soul,
My Saviour God, to Thee,
How great Thou art!
How great Thou art!

When Christ shall come,
With shouts of acclamation,
And take me home,
What joy shall fill my heart!
Then I shall bow
In humble adoration
And there proclaim,
“My God, how great Thou art!”

Then sings my soul,
My Saviour God, to Thee,
How great Thou art!
How great Thou art!
Then sings my soul,
My Saviour God, to Thee,
How great Thou art!
How great Thou art!


Lyrics ~ Carl Boberg, 1859 - 1940
English Translation ~ Stuart K. Hine, 1899 - 1989

 

[miamited]

Hi PG,

You responded:
If I might interject here, let me ask you a question. Do you have any idea how insulting and demeaning it is for you to suggest that Christians who disagree with you have not spent even 10 or 15 minutes contemplating the things of which you wrote—but with very different results?If I might interject here, let me ask you a question. Do you have any idea how insulting and demeaning it is for you to suggest that Christians who disagree with you have not spent even 10 or 15 minutes contemplating the things of which you wrote—but with very different results? God and His majesty, glory, and power are infinite, and believing what He has shown us about his creation through the creation itself does not in any way diminish who God is or how we perceive Him.

So then I guess you consider Jesus to be demeaning the Pharisees when he asked of them, "have you not read...?" I'm really very sorry to have raised your ire in my post to Joshua, and perhaps he has already done just as much study as you. It would certainly seem evident by the similarities of the positions that you each hold that you have both done similar study, and I'm sure that you find that as somehow 'supporting' your understanding.

However, I'm a man who once was lost, but believed myself to be a christian and so I am always seeking further understanding when I hear those who propose and propound a lot of the same 'faith' that I used to have. Yes, friend, there was a time in my life that I would have answered if you had asked, "Are you a christian?" in the affirmitive and I would have answered if you had asked me, "What do you believe about the creation and the universe and extraterrestrial life?" with many of the same answers that are proposed here. But, there is a basic fault in human nature that if we haven't experienced something we can't usually relate on the same level as someone who has.

If someone dear to me dies and I am suffering grief and anguish of my heart and soul over their death and you come to tell me that you understand how I feel, but you've never actually lost someone very near and dear to you, then, while you certainly may understand that I feel terrible, you don't really know the heart wrenching pain and anguish that I am actually feeling in my chest as I cry over my loss.

As for this issue at hand here, I have been in a place where I would have said exactly, yes exactly the same things that you are saying. Science has proven evolution!! Only an idiot wouldn't understand and believe the evolutionary theory that describes how all life came to be what it is today on this planet. Yes, I would have been the very first to jump in with you and explain how it's patently simple that light takes billions of years to travel from the furthest star to the earth and we couldn't possibly see all those stars out there if they hadn't been out there those billions of years. Yes, I would have been the very first person to have agreed with you and fought the same fight that Joshua is fighting as your co-counsel and I would have been absolutely incensed that anyone would dare to deny such 'truth'.

But, one day about 14 years ago I got down on my knees and I cried out to God to save me. I agreed in anguish that I was one of the worst of sinners upon the face of the earth. I asked God with as much sincerity of heart that I can even muster today, to give me wisdom and insight; to give me an unquenchable thirst to know Him, His Son, His Spirit, His word and I began to understand that I had deceived myself all of those years.

The irony, of course, is that I hadn't known it. We don't know when we are being deceived, until we see from the other side of an issue how clearly we were being deceived. So, knowing all of this, I have asked Joshua to do something that I know has made a difference in my understanding. I have asked him to give careful and serious consideration to the ultimate difference between the two Gods that are revealed in the various accounts of creative theory.

For me, it took a real long, long time of sitting and pondering and study and working through all the various and sundry theories. I had to chase rabbit trails all over the place. But, I can clearly see, and find it just as hard as you 'clearly' see that there is no difference, that there is a real difference in the power, majesty, glory and wisdom of a God who billions of years ago put into action some fairly ambiguous plan of creation that allowed all living things to pretty much become what chance and natural selection would cause them to ultimately be and a God who, in a matter of moments, wound up with the same ultimate end that we are living today, but created it all perfectly working in harmony and everything just as it was supposed to be. No chance. No natural selection. He made the alligator to be an alligator. He made the rat to be a rat. He made man to be a man.

You wrote:
God and His majesty, glory, and power are infinite, and believing what He has shown us about his creation through the creation itself does not in any way diminish who God is or how we perceive Him.

I'm sorry, friend, but that just isn't the truth and there is one who knows all truth. I ask again, let's put ourselves in His place for a moment. You are God! You have created all things in this vast realm of life in which we find ourselves living in six literal days. You told everyone that and then confirmed it again for everyone when you began the work of building up your people Israel from the Egyptian exodus. You are God! Some people who call themselves by your name walk around on the earth and say to others, "Listen, science has given us the answers that we need and those answers would contradict, in some way, the words that God has spoken to us through His word. You can't take the account of creation in Genesis literally." You continue, "He didn't really create a real live breathing man by the name of Adam, but rather, we are to undestand that this Adam figure written of in the Scriptures is a reference to how God started mankind out of other animals that lived before us." Remember, you are God!

When you hear, as you look over those of the earth searching for faithful and true servants who love you, some who claim to others to be your children explain this, but it just simply isn't the truth, do you find them faithful? Are you, as God going to just shrug your shoulders and say, "Well,they're doing the best they can and it's certainly understandable that they wouldn't be able to believe that things really happened as I wrote it out to them," or are you rather going to say, "Who do they think I am?"

I have done the same thing in my questions to you. Do you believe, through your understanding of Genesis, that Adam was a real live individual man created by the hand of God forming the dust of the ground into a living breathing single person? I absolutely believe you when you tell me that it makes no difference to you, but, and I hope that I don't again draw up your wrath, I'm not really concerned with what you want me to believe as the truth, but rather what God wants me to believe as the truth. I am firmly convicted in my spirit that it makes a big difference to God whether we believe the creation came about in 6 literal days or by 6 literal eons.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

BTW wouldn't it be great to know what Carl Boburg believed about the creation when he sat down to pen those great words.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[phoenixdem]

PG, let's play a game of pretend. Let us pretend that you are a college professor and I am a student taking a course in Evolution Basics. You are concerned that I should know the truth. What would you want me to know about evolution and how it impacts on religious beliefs?

 

[joshua41]

Hi Joshua,

If I might interject here. Let me ask you to do a favor for me. Don't bother to respond, but I'd ask you to first pray for God's wisdom. Then find a chair in a quiet place where you might have 10 or 15 minutes of privacy. Then I'd like you to consider the difference that would come about in our understanding of the glory and majesty of God under both scenarios.

In other words, I'm asking you to just sit quietly and rationalize within your own mind, work out the problem so to speak between how one would see a God who is certainly a powerful and mighty God, but instead of making everthing complete and perfect at the beginning might compare in nature to a God who, in a matter of just hours created everything in the entire universe from the most distant star of one end to the most distant star of the other, and everything was created working and in proper order perfectly. No mock up. No, well let's see how this works out. But rather created perfectly in the time and scope that the Genesis account would allow if taken literally.

Would there be any difference at all in the power, majesty, glory and wisdom of the two Gods?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

I can do that.

I am also just curious, do you believe that the modern science accurately describes the creation of the universe?