|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 8/25/2009 2:41:43 PM
|
|
|
StephenJ
Posts: 259
Joined: 12/3/2007
Status: offline
|
Why don't you take the early part of Genesis literally?
Please explain.
_____________________________
Rock on!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 8/25/2009 3:07:10 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
Just to clarify, are you referring to chapters 1-11 or more specific than that?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 8/27/2009 2:30:05 PM
|
|
|
StephenJ
Posts: 259
Joined: 12/3/2007
Status: offline
|
Basically 1-11 yes.
_____________________________
Rock on!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/1/2009 8:07:48 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
Well, SJ, it's kind of sad that you didn't get any OECs to respond to this very important question. So as a YEC who has sparred many times on these S&O threads with OEC doctrine, I will give you my perspective. The vast majority of OECs seem to hold a "magisterial" view of science over Scripture whereby God's Word must conform to man's "scientific" understanding. According to this view, nature serves as the "67th Book" of the Bible and thus all the other Books cannot contradict our scientific understanding of the physical universe. So if scientific evidence "proves" the universe is 14.5 billion years old, then a 6-day creation is impossible to accept as an accurate interpretation of Genesis 1. If scientific evidence "proves" that carnivorous dinosaurs lived millions of years before humans, then Romans 5:12 can only be correctly interpreted to mean spiritual death. So, proper OEC biblical hermeneutics must always submit to the "facts" of nature instead of the YEC approach in which scientists use Scripture to understand nature in the first place.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/1/2009 9:12:59 PM
|
|
|
Alpaca
Posts: 212
Joined: 8/27/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephenJ
Why don't you take the early part of Genesis literally?
Please explain.
Just in case you may think such a thing is odd:
"About one-third [31%] of the American adult population believes the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word. This percentage is slightly lower than several decades ago."
source
_____________________________
Half The People Have An IQ Below Average
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 3:58:26 AM
|
|
|
StephenJ
Posts: 259
Joined: 12/3/2007
Status: offline
|
But that's not science then is it?
Good scientest are suppouse to fit the evidence to their beliefs not the other way around. That's what the scientific method is all about.
_____________________________
Rock on!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 4:59:23 AM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
No.
No.
No.
Good science is supposed to stem from the evidence.
You form your beliefs based upon the evidence, not upon pre-conceived notions.
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:26:27 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Good science is supposed to stem from the evidence.
You form your beliefs based upon the evidence, not upon pre-conceived notions. Which is exactly why evolution is NOT good science!! But this thread is about why some Christians favor "old earth" and some favor "young". And the fact is that origins science is by definition non-observational. Thus, assumptions and preconceived notions are absolutely required to interpret what little evidence there is for the age of the universe. OEC starts with secular uniformitarianism as their basis of evaluation while YEC starts with historical facts recorded in the Bible. It's a very simple dichotomy.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:36:33 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3037
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephenJ
Why don't you take the early part of Genesis literally?
1.) I don't believe the original text requires what YEC's describe as a "literal" interpretation including that of a 6000yo earth and a global flood.
2.) I don't believe the NT passages discussing death entering the world through Adam were describing physical death, but rather spiritual separation from God.
3.) I don't believe the scientific evidence is compatible with a 6000yo earth or a global flood.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:38:47 AM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
OEC starts with secular uniformitarianism as their basis of evaluation while YEC starts with historical facts recorded in the Bible. It's a very simple dichotomy. It certainly is.
Though the use of the word "fact" is based upon faith rather than evidence.
Which would imply a misuse of the word, really.
Still, other fundamentalists in Delhi or Teheran would also talk about "facts" with the very same certitude.....
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:44:09 AM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Good science is supposed to stem from the evidence.
You form your beliefs based upon the evidence, not upon pre-conceived notions. Which is exactly why evolution is NOT good science!! But this thread is about why some Christians favor "old earth" and some favor "young".
Strange.
I don't recall using the term "evolution" at all.
I was merely talking about wheher belief should follow evidence or evidence should follow belief.
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 9:08:43 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
As determined by very, very few scientists. You're really not getting this, are you. Scientists collect evidence. Philosophers determine conclusions from evidence. Evidence is fixed, conclusions may vary. The alleged age of the world is a philosophical conclusion, NOT a scientific observation!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 1:46:42 PM
|
|
|
StephenJ
Posts: 259
Joined: 12/3/2007
Status: offline
|
I'm sorry I meant it the other way around. You fit your belief to the evidence not the other way around. So a scientest doing an experiment forms infrences, hypothesis, and theories based off of the results of his experiment, not the other way around.
For example if someone drops a pencil, the result is that it falls. Therefor we can conclude that some force is drawing it downward (gravity.)
Wow, that was a bad typo.
_____________________________
Rock on!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:20:32 PM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
As determined by very, very few scientists. You're really not getting this, are you. Scientists collect evidence. Philosophers determine conclusions from evidence. Evidence is fixed, conclusions may vary. The alleged age of the world is a philosophical conclusion, NOT a scientific observation!
With respect, drmark, I'll probably have to stop the conversation with you here.
I disagree with you so fundamentally that there is a danger any discourse could descend into personal derision and scorn.
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/4/2009 8:21:49 PM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephenJ
I'm sorry I meant it the other way around. You fit your belief to the evidence not the other way around. So a scientest doing an experiment forms infrences, hypothesis, and theories based off of the results of his experiment, not the other way around.
For example if someone drops a pencil, the result is that it falls. Therefor we can conclude that some force is drawing it downward (gravity.)
Wow, that was a bad typo.
Yes, you're telling me.
I thought you believed it was the other way around for a while there....
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/5/2009 3:29:08 PM
|
|
|
StephenJ
Posts: 259
Joined: 12/3/2007
Status: offline
|
That brings up the idea about whether science should dictate morality. Some scientest feel that there job is to tell people how things work, not their moral signifigance.
_____________________________
Rock on!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/5/2009 3:42:38 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
With respect, drmark, I'll probably have to stop the conversation with you here. I'm frankly surprised you lasted this long, schtumpy... 
quote:
That brings up the idea about whether science should dictate morality. Some scientest feel that there job is to tell people how things work, not their moral signifigance. Why not, SJ? Most scientists are already dictating philosophical conclusions such as the age of the universe. It's no big deal to extend that worldview to morality. BTW, figuring out how things work is very scientific. Figuring out why things work is not - that's what most scientists cannot distinguish!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/5/2009 3:53:02 PM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: StephenJ
That brings up the idea about whether science should dictate morality. Some scientest feel that there job is to tell people how things work, not their moral signifigance.
Who said science should dictate morality?
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/5/2009 3:57:12 PM
|
|
|
schtumpy
Posts: 889
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Most scientists are already dictating philosophical conclusions such as the age of the universe.
Why can't the age of the universe be measured?
_____________________________
I deplore what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
- attributed to Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/5/2009 11:54:40 PM
|
|
|
capellaslight
Posts: 83
Joined: 4/28/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why don't you take the early part of Genesis literally?
Many of us do take Genesis literally while some do not. Old earth christians have a wide variety of beliefs on Genesis 1, the flood, genealogies, evolution and Adam & Eve.
I'd rather not speak for those who do not take Genesis literally but if you have any questions on how "literal" OECers beliefs differ from "literal" YECers beliefs I'd be happy to help.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/6/2009 9:21:41 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 4622
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why can't the age of the universe be measured? God already has, but you deny the accuracy of His Word!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/6/2009 12:44:34 PM
|
|
|
shakezula
Posts: 934
Joined: 3/9/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
God already has, but you deny the accuracy of His Word!
based on the original post, i think the only people who should be answering are old earthers, as the question was addressed to them. stephen can jump in if i'm reading him wrong. but it seems to me that so far the wrong people are answering his question.
_____________________________
watch out for the oo moo and the blehblehbleh
|
|
|
|
|
RE: To all Christian "Old Earth" followers. - 9/6/2009 5:30:43 PM
|
|
|
Frontporch
Posts: 234
Joined: 6/28/2007
Status: offline
|
First, the Genesis account does not note a time duration other then day one or first day, etc. What is described are commanded processes which to have meaning require extended periods of time. Therefore the six days are literal though not necessarily consecutive or limited to a 24 hr. duration.
Secondly, the evidence for an "old" earth is overwhelming though many like to dismiss such proofs.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
