Just one example, how many more out there?

[Vance]

You seem to have a problem with the idea of dogmatic teaching. I feel very strongly about the proper reading of Genesis, but when it comes to the presentation of this issue to the non-believer and even among Christians when the subject comes up outside of such a debate forum, I have always said something VERY similar to what I proposed in the other thread. That is not dogmatism.

You and others, however, refuse to consider that such a statement is the best policy. Yet, you know that Billy Graham, whom you seem to respect would make that statement at the drop of a hat. Gauranteed.

As for Exodus 20:11, we have already discussed this at length. I am not going to repeat the same issues for you over and over.

 

[Scholar in training]

You are very much dogmatic about evolution. I don't see how you think you aren't. BTW, that was Exodus 20:11. Do you think that is allegorical as well?

Also note that it was God speaking; not Moses' paraphrasing what the Lord said.

 

[Vance]

Right, and God was speaking in Genesis 1 as well. If God can use a figurative literary framework in order to tell about the important issues of Creation, He definitely has the right to refer back to that same framework later for the teaching of those important issues and truths.

 

[SBG]

You seem to have a problem with the idea of dogmatic teaching. I feel very strongly about the proper reading of Genesis, but when it comes to the presentation of this issue to the non-believer and even among Christians when the subject comes up outside of such a debate forum, I have always said something VERY similar to what I proposed in the other thread. That is not dogmatism.

You and others, however, refuse to consider that such a statement is the best policy. Yet, you know that Billy Graham, whom you seem to respect would make that statement at the drop of a hat. Gauranteed.

As for Exodus 20:11, we have already discussed this at length. I am not going to repeat the same issues for you over and over.

You know Billy and I disagree on other issues as well. Ones I don't see the need to make public. Because I have respect for him doesn't mean I have to agree with him. He has done a lot of good, but his current idea on a few theological issues I do not agree with him.

Exodus 20:11 and Exodus 31:17 both talk of six day creation. It is very clear on the subject and is not allegorical.

 

[Vance]

You know Billy and I disagree on other issues as well. Ones I don't see the need to make public. Because I have respect for him doesn't mean I have to agree with him. He has done a lot of good, but his current idea on a few theological issues I do not agree with him.

Exodus 20:11 and Exodus 31:17 both talk of six day creation. It is very clear on the subject and is not allegorical.

Would it KILL you to say, "in my opinion" or "I think" or "the way I read it"?

Don't you think that type of humbleness is exactly what Augustine was talking about, whether he always followed his own advice or not?

 

[mhess13]

You know Billy and I disagree on other issues as well. Ones I don't see the need to make public. Because I have respect for him doesn't mean I have to agree with him. He has done a lot of good, but his current idea on a few theological issues I do not agree with him.

Exodus 20:11 and Exodus 31:17 both talk of six day creation. It is very clear on the subject and is not allegorical.

This is a good point. I know that you and i disagree ona the rapture and certainly a few other issues. I can even get along somewhat with a gap theorist or OEC. But evolution is not on the table. PERIOD
Even Hank Hanegraaff who is not kind to YECs takes a hard line against evolution because it militates against the gospel

 

[SBG]

Would it KILL you to say, "in my opinion" or "I think" or "the way I read it"?

Don't you think that type of humbleness is exactly what Augustine was talking about, whether he always followed his own advice or not?

No it wouldn't kill me. But I do think the passages are rather clear, so I apologize for believing they are.

We all need work on humbleness, I am not beyond that understanding. I have tried to be patient with your accusations as well as herev's. And I have been completely honest with you about how I feel about what you are doing here. I have not questioned your faith, but rather your theology. Yet, herev points out that I am, none the less.

You feel you are being personally attack, well there is no shortage of attacks coming from your side as well.

 

[Vance]

I have no problem with you holding fast and firm to what you believe Genesis says, I do the same. What I am talking about is a realization that, since this is NOT a salvation issue (even if some of your fellow YEC's want to make it one), and since either one of us CAN be wrong, that we agree to present our views in a way that can not be a stumbling block either way.

You don't have to water down your personal views to do this. How about something like this.

"I am absolutely, positively 100% convinced that the proper reading of the Creation accounts is a literal/historical one, and I would be happy to explain to you all the reasons for this. But, regardless, there are devout, Bible-believing Christians who differ on this, and some intepret Genesis differently and see no contradiction between evolution and Scripture. I think they are simply wrong, but the important thing is that even those who hold that view still find Scripture true and accurate. Ultimately, this is not an issue that effects salvation, those Christians who accept evolution and those who reject it are all going to Heaven."

Now, here on this board, we can hash it all out, but is that not a sound way of presenting the issue to the unbeliever and to those Christians who raise the question?