Is a Certain Origins Belief Important?

gluadys said:

Originally Posted by juvenissun

Question: Is the strength of faith significant? Yes, right?

Click to expand...

Not according to Jesus. All you need is faith as small as a mustard seed.

Click to expand...

If so, why should we "grow" spiritually? What's wrong to be a spiritual infant until we die?

juvenissun said:

Yes, but not serious enough. It is not about faith, it is about the strength of faith.

Question: Is the strength of faith significant? Yes, right?

Click to expand...

I agree with gluadys' answer. But, let me play along anyway.

How are you measuring strength? As long as we are being arbitrary, let me be arbitrary and say: The faith of the TE is vastly superior and stronger than a YEC's. A YEC's faith is simply not serious enough or strong enough. Happy?

Tinker Grey said:

What do you mean "matters"? Matters for salvation? Matters for a mature Christian life?

Click to expand...

"Matters" in terms of the correct interpretation. If evolution is real, and Adam was a historical person whom God spoke to near the Euphrates 6,000 years ago, then Genesis would still be one-hundred percent true. I didn't say that allegorists won't find salvation.

Tinker Grey said:

Why should the fact that you couldn't take it seriously as a TE have anything to do with anyone else? TE folk on this sub-forum take the rest of the Bible (and FTR, Genesis itself) quite seriously.

Click to expand...

It doesn't.

Tinker Grey said:

Cite? I'm not be snarky here. I really want to know if you can show research that demonstrates or whether this is your personal observation. If so, where have you observed this? Conversations here rarely stray into annihilationism or universalism.

Click to expand...

All the YECs I know in real life, and a few whom I've witnessed on christianforums (though I'm not sure if they speak for everyone here) tend to believe that people are to be judged by a standard they're unaware of. But I've never known a TE who believes in a literal hell.

huldah153 said:

"Matters" in terms of the correct interpretation. If evolution is real, and Adam was a historical person whom God spoke to near the Euphrates 6,000 years ago, then Genesis would still be one-hundred percent true. I didn't say that allegorists won't find salvation.



It doesn't.



All the YECs I know in real life, and a few whom I've witnessed on christianforums (though I'm not sure if they speak for everyone here) tend to believe that people are to be judged by a standard they're unaware of. But I've never known a TE who believes in a literal hell.

Click to expand...

*raises hand*

Now you do. Pleased to meet you.

huldah163,

We had a staunch Calvinist around here for a while who was a TE. He may have believed in a literal hell, but I don't recall. (Ah, there you go. See Melethiel's post above.)

But, to be fair, don't even most conservatives define hell as "eternal separation" rather than literal flames? (E.g., Billy Graham.) Clearly, non-literal doesn't equate with annihilationism.

If by "literal" you mean "actual" (a mistake, I think), then I'd venture you'll find that many if not most TEs here believe in an "actual" hell, flames or not. *shrug* But, perhaps not.

As to "matters", you first said you think believing in an actual Adam, etc., matters and that you couldn't take the Bible seriously when you didn't. I think it was a reasonable inference that you believe that one cannot the Bible seriously unless they took Adam as literal/actual. Perhaps you meant only that it matters for you? Yes? If so, you might want to be careful about using the second person pronoun in forming such sentences.

You know Billy Graham was a TE, or open to the idea anyway.

juvenissun said:

Question: Is the strength of faith significant? Yes, right?

gluadys said:

Not according to Jesus. All you need is faith as small as a mustard seed.

Click to expand...

If so, why should we "grow" spiritually? What's wrong to be a spiritual infant until we die?

Click to expand...

Aren't mustard seeds supposed to grow?

Assyrian said:

You know Billy Graham was a TE, or open to the idea anyway.

Click to expand...

Really? I would have thought not. Isn't he still alive, BTW?

Hmm ... this quote at least allows that he was open to it--so you are right: http://www.answersincreation.org/billy_graham.htm

Well, substitute some other well known figure.

Ultimately, I don't believe a particular interpretation of Genesis 1-11 is that important, in the overall picture.

Are there certain fundamental truths that at least are in my mind, are something beyond debate? Yes, and these essential truths are spelled out in the Apostle's Creed:

I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth; And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord: who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; the third day he rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven,and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints,the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

The Apostle's Creed states that God is indeed the creator of heaven and earth, focusing on the WHO but is completely silent as to how long ago it happened and the means by which it happened. Science is just helping fill in the blanks. Based on that, I don't see that there's any incompatibility between believing in a 13.4+ billion year old universe with diversification of species through evolution and the points enumerated in the above. Again, a belief in a literal 6-day creation that happened 6,000 years ago, is just an interpretation.

The thing that turns me off the most about YEC is the insistence of some that unless you hold to that belief, that somehow you're less Christian or not even a Christian at all unless you hold to that viewpoint. The website AiG, for instance. That's the impression I get whenever I see that quote about when science and the Bible seem to be in conflict that it's our interpretation of science that's wrong.

I don't really know whether to think of hell as fire and brimstone (Johannine Apocalyptic imagery), or as cold darkness and the gnashing of teeth (Jesus' own imagery more frequently employed in the Gospels). Both are quite incompatible on the surface of it, at least in the way we physically understand fire, brimstone, coldness and darkness. However, I do believe that sinners who die separate from God will be condemned to eternal separation from Him, and that is the ultimate punishment imaginable for creatures created for fellowship and communion both with God and each other.

Huldah, it may be that you've never met conservative TEs before. ^^

Tinker Grey said:

I agree with gluadys' answer. But, let me play along anyway.

How are you measuring strength? As long as we are being arbitrary, let me be arbitrary and say: The faith of the TE is vastly superior and stronger than a YEC's. A YEC's faith is simply not serious enough or strong enough. Happy?

Click to expand...

Back to what the argument was:

Literal belief is a stronger faith. Because the person believes a description, which is apparently difficult to comprehend, as a literal truth.

So the disciples who took Jesus literally and stopped following Jesus when he told them they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood, had greater faith than Peter who struggled with what Jesus said but clung to him anyway?

juvenissun said:

Back to what the argument was:

Literal belief is a stronger faith. Because the person believes a description, which is apparently difficult to comprehend, as a literal truth.

Click to expand...

No, it is not a matter of the literal description being difficult to comprehend. It is a matter of the literal description being inappropriate.

One could argue that the opposite of literal belief is stronger because it does not need the crutch of literalism to sustain faith in the scriptures as inspired and authoritative.

But either way, a strong belief is not necessarily a correct belief.

Assyrian said:

So the disciples who took Jesus literally and stopped following Jesus when he told them they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood, had greater faith than Peter who struggled with what Jesus said but clung to him anyway?

Click to expand...

... you mean we're not supposed to?

*drops the drumstick in shock*