Is creation(ism) a good thing or a bad thing

[Not_By_Chance]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

 

[Armoured]

A bad thing. It turns people away from Christianity, and it turns others away from science.

 

[Shempster]

It can be bad if we are expected to believe that those dino's got buried a few thousand years ago or that the Sphinx is about the same age.

 

[SkyWriting]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

All the religious cults base their persuasion methods around creating a "separatist" mentality
and uses shallow logic and "bashing" to show that the "others" are less than human and that
"they" are causing all the problems you see in society. "They" are opening the floodgates to
hell and all forms of vileness is flowing out to hurt your family becasue of "their" beliefs.

This may sound familiar, but I'm referring to what happened in Rwanda when the population
was reduced by 70%.

 

[Hoghead1]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

I think Ham is a total and complete phony. He sports honorary "doctorates" from three non-accredited schools. In 2011. the Great homeland Convention " disinvited" him from all further meetings, saying his remarks about other Christian were unnecessarily mean-spirited, at best divisive and at worst defamatory. I think he is ill-educated and ignorant, both in science and in Scripture. I would not trust him any further than I could throw him, and many others share my view.

 

[alexandriaisburning]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

I think creationism--as espoused by Ham and those of his ilk--is immensely damaging. Ham's worldview is an unconscious materialism wrapped in the clothing of religious belief.

One of the core principles of Christian belief is that of creation ex nihilo. Christian belief does not assert that--as Ham himself often says--"the universe came from God". No, the universe was created ex nihilo, out of nothing. It does not have a material nor causal connection to the existence of God; and yet miraculously, and mysteriously, God is still creator.

The problem with creationism is that it attempts to forge a material link between the phenomenology of the created world and the eternality of God's eternal being. Such a linking not only undermines the central tenant of ex nihilo creation, but even worse indoctrinates those unfortunate enough to buy "creationism" into a thoroughly material worldview, a worldview in which God is not the ineffable creator, but rather just the "biggest thing" in the universe.

 

[Armoured]

I think creationism--as espoused by Ham and those of his ilk--is immensely damaging. Ham's worldview is an unconscious materialism wrapped in the clothing of religious belief.

One of the core principles of Christian belief is that of creation ex nihilo. Christian belief does not assert that--as Ham himself often says--"the universe came from God". No, the universe was created ex nihilo, out of nothing. It does not have a material nor causal connection to the existence of God; and yet miraculously, and mysteriously, God is still creator.

The problem with creationism is that it attempts to forge a material link between the phenomenology of the created world and the eternality of God's eternal being. Such a linking not only undermines the central tenant of ex nihilo creation, but even worse indoctrinates those unfortunate enough to buy "creationism" into a thoroughly material worldview, a worldview in which God is not the ineffable creator, but rather just the "biggest thing" in the universe.

Have you met @AV1611VET ?

 

[Steve Petersen]

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although 'they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.'"

- St. Augustine of Hippo, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book I.20.39

 

[Steve Petersen]

 

[alexandriaisburning]

Have you met @AV1611VET ?

I don't believe so. Friend of yours?

 

[Armoured]

I don't believe so. Friend of yours?

Probably not the word I'd use. He says "ex nihilo" a lot, though.

 

[BobRyan]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

Creationism - is good if you are a Christian or a scientist.

It is bad if you are an atheist or some other form of believer in junk-science.

 

[BobRyan]

View attachment 173628

I find that quote from augustine to be informative when it comes to his own 1 day 10-second re-imagining of the 7 days of creation week down to 1 literal day.

Dawkins admits that blind-faith evolutionism destroyed his Christian faith.

Provine and P.Z.Meyers admit to the same thing.

Darwin admits to the same thing.

Atheists freely admit that the Bible is opposed to their doctrines on origins.
Many Christians read the Bible and find that to be true - so they refuse to surrender their Christian faith to junk-science blind-faith evolutionism - and they also refuse to allow evolutionism to hijack actual science.

 

[paloma22]

I often hear Christians say that to not accept evolution is damaging to the Gospel because it destroys its credibility in the current scientific age. But there is another side too as discussed here. I must admit that from personal experience, when Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis came to speak at my local church, I found his presentation strengthened my faith in the Biblical texts immensely. What do others think?

Ken Ham is awesome and has a wonderful ministry. Led me to Christ.

 

[paloma22]

I think Ham is a total and complete phony. He sports honorary "doctorates" from three non-accredited schools. In 2011. the Great homeland Convention " disinvited" him from all further meetings, saying his remarks about other Christian were unnecessarily mean-spirited, at best divisive and at worst defamatory. I think he is ill-educated and ignorant, both in science and in Scripture. I would not trust him any further than I could throw him, and many others share my view.

You can read some of the comments here https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=186020768110064

I fully support Ham and his comments, he is entitled to his opinion as is everybody. Dr. Peter Enns clearly rejects Genesis, so it makes sense that Ham would have something to say about what he is teaching. Sometimes taking a stand for Truth is not the most popular thing to do.

From AiG >>>In reviewing Mr. Ham’s statements that gave rise to this dispute, the Board finds the substance of his statements entirely consistent with AiG’s mission and historical message. We agree with what Mr. Ham said. Regarding the “spirit” of Mr. Ham’s statements, we find no basis for condemnation. We find no evidence of Mr. Ham questioning anyone’s salvation. To the contrary, Mr. Ham and this ministry have repeatedly stated that salvation is based entirely upon faith in Christ, independent of one’s belief on origins. Similarly, we find no instance of Mr. Ham questioning the integrity or intelligence of another. Mr. Ham appropriately took issue on several instances with the teaching of false doctrine, particularly with false teachings on origins. We find no evidence that these doctrinal criticisms included attacks on anyone’s salvation, intelligence, or integrity.

more... https://answersingenesis.org/ministry-news/core-ministry/kicked-out-of-two-homeschool-conferences/

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

It can be bad if we are expected to believe that those dino's got buried a few thousand years ago or that the Sphinx is about the same age.

Why would you have a hard time believing that? If you had never heard of the theory of evolution and all you learned was the Biblical account of creation and the flood, then do you think the dino's and such things would be hard to understand and accept?

 

[Hoghead1]

Why would you have a hard time believing that? If you had never heard of the theory of evolution and all you learned was the Biblical account of creation and the flood, then do you think the dino's and such things would be hard to understand and accept?

That misses the point. The point is we all have heard of evolution. The Bible preaches a flat earth and a geocentric solar system. Had we never learned modern astronomy, they would be no problem and readily accepted. But the fact is we do know modern astronomy and so that makes a real difference in our understanding of teh biblical geophysics.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I think creationism--as espoused by Ham and those of his ilk--is immensely damaging. Ham's worldview is an unconscious materialism wrapped in the clothing of religious belief.

One of the core principles of Christian belief is that of creation ex nihilo. Christian belief does not assert that--as Ham himself often says--"the universe came from God". No, the universe was created ex nihilo, out of nothing. It does not have a material nor causal connection to the existence of God; and yet miraculously, and mysteriously, God is still creator.

The problem with creationism is that it attempts to forge a material link between the phenomenology of the created world and the eternality of God's eternal being. Such a linking not only undermines the central tenant of ex nihilo creation, but even worse indoctrinates those unfortunate enough to buy "creationism" into a thoroughly material worldview, a worldview in which God is not the ineffable creator, but rather just the "biggest thing" in the universe.

Wouldn't creatio ex deo be a better understanding for Christians?

 

[Paidiske]

Wouldn't creatio ex deo be a better understanding for Christians?

Creation ex nihilo is a doctrine which developed over against the idea that before God created the world, there was primeval disordered matter, and that creation was the act of shaping and bringing order to that pre-existent matter. (Hence, out of nothing, rather than out of something that already existed).

Ex deo would suggest that the substance, the stuff, of matter was itself made of God's substance, rather than created by God to be separate and distinct from God; it would lead to a kind of panentheism, which is problematic for Christians.

 

[Hoghead1]

You can read some of the comments here https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=186020768110064

I fully support Ham and his comments, he is entitled to his opinion as is everybody. Dr. Peter Enns clearly rejects Genesis, so it makes sense that Ham would have something to say about what he is teaching. Sometimes taking a stand for Truth is not the most popular thing to do.

From AiG >>>In reviewing Mr. Ham’s statements that gave rise to this dispute, the Board finds the substance of his statements entirely consistent with AiG’s mission and historical message. We agree with what Mr. Ham said. Regarding the “spirit” of Mr. Ham’s statements, we find no basis for condemnation. We find no evidence of Mr. Ham questioning anyone’s salvation. To the contrary, Mr. Ham and this ministry have repeatedly stated that salvation is based entirely upon faith in Christ, independent of one’s belief on origins. Similarly, we find no instance of Mr. Ham questioning the integrity or intelligence of another. Mr. Ham appropriately took issue on several instances with the teaching of false doctrine, particularly with false teachings on origins. We find no evidence that these doctrinal criticisms included attacks on anyone’s salvation, intelligence, or integrity.

more... https://answersingenesis.org/ministry-news/core-ministry/kicked-out-of-two-homeschool-conferences/

That well may be what Ham supporters have to say. However, I see and know otherwise. I have no tolerance for phonies sporting phony degrees, to start with.