The Case For A Creator

[Mallon]

Holes: no unified theory, no comprehension of extra-dimensional physics, no cure for cancer, no solution to global warming, it put Bill Gates in charge of the computing universe.

It should come as no surprise to you that science is a work in progress. It always will be. So to expect that we should have a grand "unified theory" at this point is ludicrous. Evolution is certainly the "grand unified theory" of biology that links together every disparate idea in the field, yet creationists refuse to accept the science behind it. What makes you think that an even grander unified theory would be accepted by creationists anyway?
More importantly, what do you think can fill those gaps, if not science? Prayer? Animal sacrifice? To expect God to step in and magically hand us a cure to cancer is laughable. God has already given us what we need to get the job done, and in our apathy, we just aren't there yet. Same goes for putting an end to poverty, war, etc. That isn't to say we cannot work with God in the process...

What can patch the gaps? The God of the gaps. (I have yet to see what that term is so offensive, or so obviously flawed. Its like an inside joke only naturalist/scientists seem to get. The gaps seem to be pretty well established, according to scripture.)

Mat 7:9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?

Jam 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Notice what James doesn't say. James doesn't say, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask that God be the answer." God will provide the answer, but He won't be the answer. God-of-the-gaps theology holds that God is the answer; that anything science cannot yet explain must have been bridged by a miraculous act of God. This is both poor science and weak theology.
James does say to ask God for wisdom and He will provide the answer. This does not exempt us from continued thinking and seeking on our part.

 

[pastorkevin73]

Ah! The old strawman and opposing Lee Strobel arguements. It's been awhile since I've seen this argument.
No use debating with TEs because they will not listen to the truth of God's word. In a few words, there is a lack for the Fear of the Lord.

 

[shernren]

Ah! The old strawman and opposing Lee Strobel arguements. It's been awhile since I've seen this argument.
No use debating with TEs because they will not listen to the truth of God's word. In a few words, there is a lack for the Fear of the Lord.

I'm sorry, but we can't really oppose Lee Strobel arguments when we haven't seen a single Lee Strobel argument properly and specifically brought forward here.

 

[sfs]

I'm sorry, but we can't really oppose Lee Strobel arguments when we haven't seen a single Lee Strobel argument properly and specifically brought forward here.

There's no need to bring forward a Lee Strobel argument: it's already been established that any opposition to his arguments will be because you refuse to listen to God's word and don't fear God. That really cuts down on the need to offer evidence or logic.

 

[chaoschristian]

Unless you have definitive proof that I or any of the other TEs on this forum lied when we agreed to the TOS of CF when we joined, I am going to have to insist that you stop attacking our faith.

Ah! The old strawman and opposing Lee Strobel arguements. It's been awhile since I've seen this argument.
No use debating with TEs because they will not listen to the truth of God's word. In a few words, there is a lack for the Fear of the Lord.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Ah! The old strawman and opposing Lee Strobel arguements. It's been awhile since I've seen this argument.
No use debating with TEs because they will not listen to the truth of God's word. In a few words, there is a lack for the Fear of the Lord.

it always comes down to this kind of statements for YECist. No one but themselves can be a real Christian, evolution and the origins issues are really tests of true faith and salvation issues. They may talk as if this was not true but in the final analysis this is always their trump card.

No one can be a Christian and truely fear and love God unless they believe this very specific interpretation of Genesis 1-3. In fact, it is more important than faith in Jesus as the Christ, it is more important than the resurrection, it is really the heart of the YECist's faith, thus justifying their initials-Young Earth Christians.

to which i can only reply:
SURPRISE

Mat 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done [it] unto me.

Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

 

[pastorkevin73]

Unless you have definitive proof that I or any of the other TEs on this forum lied when we agreed to the TOS of CF when we joined, I am going to have to insist that you stop attacking our faith.

I'm not attacking anyone's faith, unless you are speaking of your faith in evolution.
I stand by my statement on the lack of the Fear of the Lord. TEs clearly do not believe Genesis 1. To not believe what God says in His word is a lack of Fear of the Lord. We don't have the luxury of having opinions on God's word. Either we believe it or not. Again, to not believe God's word is to not Fear Him.

 

[pastorkevin73]

it always comes down to this kind of statements for YECist. No one but themselves can be a real Christian, evolution and the origins issues are really tests of true faith and salvation issues. They may talk as if this was not true but in the final analysis this is always their trump card.

No one can be a Christian and truely fear and love God unless they believe this very specific interpretation of Genesis 1-3. In fact, it is more important than faith in Jesus as the Christ, it is more important than the resurrection, it is really the heart of the YECist's faith, thus justifying their initials-Young Earth Christians.

to which i can only reply:
SURPRISE

It's not a matter of who's interpretation of Genesis 1-3 is correct. It's a matter of believing what God says in His word. Again, not believing God's word is a lack of Fear of the Lord. It is clear that Genesis 1 connects literally to Abraham. The geneology from Adam to Abraham is clear.

It would be interesting to find out what kind of devotional and spiritual discipline life TEs have?

 

[gluadys]

TEs clearly do not believe Genesis 1.

You call this not attacking our faith?


What gives you the right to say we "clearly" do not believe Genesis 1? Other than your personal opinion that your literalistic interpretation is the only correct way to believe it?


Why is it so incomprehensible and unacceptable to you to consider that it may be believed as truth conveyed in poetic form? Why is this not just as clearly belief in God's word as a literal interpretation of the text?

 

[pastorkevin73]

You call this not attacking our faith?


What gives you the right to say we "clearly" do not believe Genesis 1? Other than your personal opinion that your literalistic interpretation is the only correct way to believe it?


Why is it so incomprehensible and unacceptable to you to consider that it may be believed as truth conveyed in poetic form? Why is this not just as clearly belief in God's word as a literal interpretation of the text?

Why is it so hard for TEs to accept the truth of Genesis? It doesn't matter what literary form it is written in. Truth is truth. THe literary arguement is a weak one. For example, there are many, many poems out there that do make true statements. If someone writes in a poem that snow is white are you going to question it and say, "It's not true because it is poetry"? You cannot use literary form and structure to support your arguement.
Must I remind you that there is the geneologies that go back to Adam, even starting from Jesus on back?

 

[gluadys]

Why is it so hard for TEs to accept the truth of Genesis? It doesn't matter what literary form it is written in. Truth is truth.

That is my point. Truth is truth no matter what literary form it is written in. But the literary form is also a clue to how to intepret it. Poetry is not science and should not be interpreted as if it were.


So it is not hard for me at all to accept the truth of Geneis. I do accept it. What I don't accept is your opinion of what that truth must include in a literal sense. Nor do I accept that you have a right to say I am not accepting the truth of Genesis just because I don't agree with your preferred interpretation of it.

 

[Mallon]

What church do you preach at, pastorkevin73?

 

[Deamiter]

As a TE who prays and reads his Bible daily, I must say that I believe 100% every bit of the truth in Genesis 1-3.

Of course, it's not written in a historical form, and I don't think it's particularly accurate as history -- but that's never been the truth in Genesis 1-3 so that doesn't affect my belief one bit.

I always cringe a bit when a YECist says, "What, you don't think it's true because it's poetry?" What a strawman! All TEs on this board (that I've heard speak on this anyway) believe 100% the truth of Genesis 1-3! Few if any make the mistake of claiming that because it's true means it must be historically accurate.

There's as much truth in Psalms as Matthew. There's just as much truth in Genesis. I believe every word of the Bible, I'm just not arrogant enough to claim that because others disagree with my interpretation of scriptures, they "don't believe the Bible."

 

[Melethiel]

It would be interesting to find out what kind of devotional and spiritual discipline life TEs have?

TE's are not less devout than YECs, if that's what you're driving at.

On the other hand, who are you to judge men's hearts?

 

[pastorkevin73]

TE's are not less devout than YECs, if that's what you're driving at.

On the other hand, who are you to judge men's hearts?

You are making an assumption which was never my intent.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

TEs clearly do not believe Genesis 1

my understanding of Gen 1 is no different than any other person who reads it with the kline's framework interpretation in mind. Most people who are framework are probably conservative reformed and old earth creationists.

I suspect that you can not tell the difference between the spiritual life of YEC or OEC or TE, each conforming more to the demands of their individual churches or denominations more than any conformance to a view of origins is concerned.

it goes back to my constant refrain that TE's theology is indistinguishable from their brethren in that congregation or denomination, origins issues play almost no role in systematic theology. You can justify any of the various ideas about original sin and federal headship (imho the two most important doctrines tied directly into Gen 1-3) with either a historical or generic or allegorical Adam.


this statement ought to be not:
TEs clearly do not believe Genesis 1
but rather
TEs clearly do not believe Genesis 1 in the same way as do YECists.

it is not a matter of believing that Gen 1 is authoritative or inspired or the very words of God (all of which i believe) but rather believing that a very specific set of interpretations, YEC, are the correct and proper way to interpret Gen 1.

 

[shernren]

We don't have the luxury of having opinions on God's word. Either we believe it or not.

You better tell 2,000 years of theologians that they didn't have the luxury of having opinions on God's word and that they're faithless losers with no spiritual lives. Because TE is just another instance of what theology has done so far, of work that has gone into the dictionaries and commentaries you use, of work that you do every Sunday when you step up to the pulpit and preach:

TEs are just trying to figure out how the Bible should be interpreted so that it carries weight to the world as they see it.

Why is that such an offense to you?

 

[pastorkevin73]

You better tell 2,000 years of theologians that they didn't have the luxury of having opinions on God's word and that they're faithless losers with no spiritual lives. Because TE is just another instance of what theology has done so far, of work that has gone into the dictionaries and commentaries you use, of work that you do every Sunday when you step up to the pulpit and preach:

TEs are just trying to figure out how the Bible should be interpreted so that it carries weight to the world as they see it.

Why is that such an offense to you?

You forget that TEs have rejected 2000 years (around) of biblical and theological study. I haven't! One other thing is that it is the Holy Spirit that opens our eyes to the truth of God's word.
How quick we are to reject those who have gone before us, just because of one person having a brain fart that doesn't fit with scritpure and is not based on science.

 

[Melethiel]

You forget that TEs have rejected 2000 years (around) of biblical and theological study. I haven't! One other thing is that it is the Holy Spirit that opens our eyes to the truth of God's word.
How quick we are to reject those who have gone before us, just because of one person having a brain fart that doesn't fit with scritpure and is not based on science.

TE's are far from the first to reject a literal interpretation. In fact, non-literal interpretations have been quite common throughout the 2000 years of theology.

 

[busterdog]

You forget that TEs have rejected 2000 years (around) of biblical and theological study. I haven't! One other thing is that it is the Holy Spirit that opens our eyes to the truth of God's word.
How quick we are to reject those who have gone before us, just because of one person having a brain fart that doesn't fit with scritpure and is not based on science.

I have to confess sympathy with the suspicion that alot of the TE comment here is just not based in a real concern to be right with what the Word says. Understand that I am speaking about some positions of some people, not judging hearts in all aspects of their relationship with the Lord and reading of the Word.

Edited to add: That is somewhat of a confession. I don't know how else to say it without it sounding at least a bit confrontational -- is that completely avoidable?

Quite frankly, I don't know how you can believe in an inerrant and literal word and not have that concern -- and not say something about it. Similarly, if you really believe that the truth is a metaphorical truth and that is what is intened, you should say something about it.

Bur, for all my sympathy with your orientation, I would find a different way to say it. I also understand your exasperation with your opponents. But, it is probably better not to express that as such and as if you need to fight it combatively to the extent you have. I think I know something about it because I have been there. I ask TEs to speak directly to their own on such issues, so I am doing the same.

Edited to add: With blessings and thanks for your devotion to the Word.