grmorton said:
Most of the opposition came from the theological conservatives of his day--the pharisees, who didn't like being told they were wrong.
Yes, I agree, but more than half of the disciples left Jesus as well, and they were not Pharisees or theologians. They were normal people who believed Jesus was the Christ. And upon hearing this message, they left Him.
grmorton said:
The catch 22 is that in order to be from God he must speak the truth. If someone comes up to you, claims to be a prophet and says that the sea is a beautiful pink with purple polka-dots, you would not believe he was from God. That is what you are trying to do with your evolution quiestion. And I don't beleive that you don't care about what science says. YOu would love it if science backed up your view.
First off, how do you know what you see is the truth? You yourself said you can be wrong.
Lets keep in mind that a prophet wouldnt talk about pink with purple polka-dots, a prophet speaks the word of God. And if a prophet did come and tell you the earth was created in six days, there was a global flood, I assume you wouldnt believe because you *need* a scientific explanation of the data first, correct? It would be too much to ask for you to believe by faith alone, even if your eyes see otherwise, correct?
I honestly dont care what science says. But, I would use it to back up a position if needed. But my position does not rely on science; it relies on the Word of God.
I dont need science to back up my view, nor do I think science will ever be capable of completely backing my view. When one has the Word of God, and has complete faith that what God says is true in every sense, there is no need to look further.
grmorton said:
Since I have a different interpretation of what the Bible says about evolution (something you haven't commented on) I don't see how it would be easy for you to convince me by showing me your interpretation. Believe me, I have run down all the arguments in this area. However if you could convince me with what I see, by explaining the geologic data, I would believe and become a YEC again. But no one ever takes me up on that offer.
I thought I addressed your thoughts about the Bible talking about Evolution, did I not? Wasnt it Genesis 1:20 and 1:24?
How about I showed you what the Hebrew language says? Would you believe me? Or do you need someone to explain what you see, the geologic data, in order for you to believe?
grmorton said:
No, you are in the position of telling me what you THINK God said. That is a different thing. In order to be telling me what God said, you have to place yourself in the position of the infallible interpretor. ARe you absolutely infallible in your interpretation of the Bible--kind of like the ex cathedra statements of the Pope?
But, if I just present verses, without interpretation, shall you still tell me that I telling you what I think God says? If that is the case, then no one can really have any faith in what they read to be true.
I dont have to place myself as an infallible interpreter. I can just present verses, but again, will you just say this is my interpretation if no interpretation is given?
Mind you, I never claimed to have complete understanding, nor did I say I was infallible. How can I be? I am the worst sinner here.
grmorton said:
What you care about is what you think God is saying. There is a clear differentiation between what God says and what you say he says. Or are you God's trusted prophet?
What I care about is being in correct doctrine. If I say the Bible saying evolution, I would be the biggest evolutionist you have ever seen.
Can you show me where I differ from what the Bible teaches?
I dont claim to be anything. And if I was, you wouldnt listen to me anyways. You have more trust in what you see than in what you believe.
grmorton said:
I find it odd that a guy who is implying that he is an infallible interpretor of the Bible can talk about pride in others. And before you deny this, consider answering the question: Have you ever decided that an interpretation of the Bible which you held to was wrong and then changed it?
If you answer 'no' then you have said you are infallible. If you say you have, then you can't claim to only be passing along God's message as you claim. YOU are passing along YOUR UNDERSTANDING of God's message.
Did I say I was infallible? If not, why do you say I am implying this? Pride is something I know very well. I too stumble with my own pride. I never claimed to be without my own sins. But if you wish to turn this into a discussion about my sins, then pave the way.
I have been wrong about interpretations, but this mostly happened within the first few months of being a Christian. Take a pre-tribulation rapture for one, it just doesnt seem Biblical to me.
Before I was a Christian, I would have upheld evolution just as much as any TE here. Even for a few months after being a Christian, I upheld evolution. Upon my studies of Gods Word and His hand leading me, I became convinced that God created in six days and evolution is not the answer. Science never changed my perspective, God did.
You call it passing on my understanding of Gods Word, and it is. Paul passed on his understanding of Jesus Christ. It is not the understanding that makes something wrong. But this understanding must be based on Truth. The Truth as I know it, comes from God, and it can be found in Gods Word.
Science is speculative and can never be claimed as truth, but I have a God who is complete Truth and He has given me His Word that tells me of Truth, in all sense of the word. I believe, even though it is extremely unpopular to do so. And yet even more so, because I dont look for science to back up my beliefs, I rely solely on the Word of God and His leading.
Tell me, grmorton, do you believe the end is near?
grmorton said:
True, but do you know how to tell the difference between a logical argument which is true and one which is false? OBSERVATION. If you deduce that a horse has 84 teeth, and I say another number, we can go look in the horses mouth. That is science. It settles the difference between 2 perfectly logical arguments which lead to different observational results.
And even this observation can be flawed. Can you go back 4000 years and see what it looked like? I am aware you think you can be digging, but do you honestly know what you see, is for a fact, correct? Can you state for a fact, that things happened exactly as you see them?
Can you state for a fact that when God allowed this supernatural event, that things were not the same as they are now, as they were then? Can you state for a fact that God didnt clean things up a bit after He destroyed all life? This is God, and God does allow our faith to be tested. Read Job, he was a righteous man. In his time, none were more righteous. Satan sifted him like wheat; God allowed this so Jobs faith can be tested. Job didnt understand why these things happened to him, he did nothing against God. But God wanted Jobs faith to increase. And it did.
Today, we look out and see many things that dont make sense with Gods Word. I believe God is allowing our faith to be tested. Shall we believe what He says, or shall we believe what scientists tell us, which is based off their world views?
I believe Satan would do anything to creep in and get a Christian to say Did God really say
This is what Satan will do in the last days, cause a great falling away. I believe this great falling away will be attributed to science, logic and reason. For these are the tools used to say there is no God. And within the Church, it will become complacent, as it is today, because of its belief that Jesus wont be coming any time soon. And this is when Satan will come and sweep people away.
You see, what TEs dont get is that it is not YEC that is causing this falling away; it is the people themselves that cause it, for themselves. Logic, reason, and science are the tools to get man to trust himself more than God. This falling away must happen for prophecy to be fulfilled, before Christs coming. For it is written. And here we are seeing it.
grmorton said:
My entire career has been focused on God and how his word can be consistent with observational science. That surely isn't a waste of time.
I didnt say your work was a waste of time. I was just explaining my feelings. I feel every aspect of our lives, as Christians, ought to be spent teaching Gods Word. But that is just me. You dont have to agree.
grmorton said:
Never have I said I know everything. But that isn't the same as saying I know nothing. I have a 4400 book science library and I have thousands of articles in files here. I have worked hard to know what I do know. But there is still so much to learn. But, you offer no learning, just fideism.
I wasnt stating you did, but rather saying you dont. I am very much aware that you are intelligent. I never thought otherwise. There is no need to tell me how many books you have or what you have read to make me believe you are intelligent. I already do.
Well, I apologize that I dont have some scientific knowledge to teach you, but rather can teach you about believe on faith alone. Personally, when all is said and done, God isnt going to judge me according to what job I held, but rather by the faith I had. So to me, faith is much more important than scientific facts.
grmorton said:
You weren't talking about that.
Actually I was. You dont have to believe me, but I am telling you the truth.
grmorton said:
It isn't that God is illogical. It is what people say he did which should have observational consequences, but no one can find those consequences.
My experience has been that many atheist want God to appear to them in human form and tell them He is God. And these atheists will freely admit if such a thing happened they wouldnt believe Him anyways.
Simply put, their hearts are hardened.
grmorton said:
It actually doesn't speak of a global flood. The 'eretz' was flooded. If you require that 'eretz' (which is most often translated 'land') has to mean planet earth, then Abraham disobeyed God. God told him to leave his 'eretz' and go to an 'eretz' God would show him. And if Abe was disobedient then just about everything we believe in the OT is false.
And the Bible speaks of 6-days only if the word yom means a 24 hour period. The word may not at all refer to a 24 hour period.
Is your argument solely based on the fact of how often a word is used to mean X? Are you trying to say because erets has many different meanings that it could not mean earth, as is one of its meanings?
Well, if that is your argument, why stop at land? Why not say it means sheol, since that is also one of erets meanings? We could also say it means wilderness. We could translate Genesis 1:1 to say First, choose angels in the sky (and the) wilderness! For these are the meanings that each of the words can have.
I do believe you are intelligent, but your argument above is not very intelligent. To say that if one passage uses erets to mean earth, that some other passage MUST use it the same, is completely illogical. It also shows that you know the Hebrew word, but do not understand the Hebrew context.