Creationists ignore the testament of God

LEDBE
G

Greymage

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
406
Location
Austin, TX
Take it on faith that the Bible is the literal word of God.

Why then do creationists attack evolution?

It should be obvious that the Bible is subject to interpretation; just look at the number of Christian churches - all but one (possibly all) are apostate. The Bible was cited by both sides in the American slavery debate. Galileo was persecuted for claiming the earth moved around the sun, rather than vice versa (ok, so this is not strictly correct, there were academic politics behind it, but nevertheless...), so clearly the priesthood at the time interpreted the Bible incorrectly.

The universe is also the testament of its Creator. When scientists explain how the universe works, they are revealing the testament of God.

When creationists assert the universe is only 10,000 years old because "the Bible says so", despite the fact that scientists can see stars billions of light years away, they are espousing their own beliefs, not the testament of God, much as pro-slavery pastors interpreted the Bible to support their beliefs.

A seeming conflict between science and the Bible means that a specific interpretation of the Bible is wrong (not the Bible itself), and the correct interpretation of God's word must be found. Anything else is heresy, since the universe is also God's testament.
 
I guess it is because sometimes flawed human beings try to make it say things it doesn't to suit their own personal desires or dogma.

My statement about the 10,000 year old earth is: Well, who KNOWS how long it was between "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." and "And the earth was without form and void...." If God transcends any static, linear time measurements, there's no telling how long such pauses would be.

But then, that's just another idea from another flawed human being. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Hobo said:
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." and "And the earth was without form and void...."

Sounds like the the start of a good story being told around a warm fire on a cold winter's evening! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Which is what it was before it was written down by some Jewish scribes.
 
One definition of "Creationist" is a contemporary descendent of men who created God.

Brightnorm
 
I'm really looking forwards to the new Thunderbirds movie this summer. Anybody else going to see it ?
 
[ QUOTE ]
lightnix said:
I'm really looking forwards to the new Thunderbirds movie this summer. Anybody else going to see it ?

[/ QUOTE ]

If its about those Air Force Jets, I'll be there!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Greymage said:
A seeming conflict between science and the Bible means that a specific interpretation of the Bible is wrong (not the Bible itself), and the correct interpretation of God's word must be found. Anything else is heresy, since the universe is also God's testament.

[/ QUOTE ]

I recall taking an AP bio class in High School during the mid 90's. My school couldn't afford to get new books so we used the ones from the 70's. We were told to disregard the chapters on photosynthesis because the information in it was wrong. Apparently the scientific prophets of the 70's were all heretics of God's testimony.... how do we know today's scientific prophets aren't the same? Science is often driven by faith as much as religion is. To place religion under science is to assume that science is all, and always fact. This is just not true. Science is a growing study that will never end, therefore science is never an absolute truth. To take it as absolute truth is have faith in it as truth.

Newtonian physics was great, and we applied it at the atomic level until we realized that quantum physics requires different scientific rules and laws. I don't think newton was a heretic, he was simply observing the world around him. Science is a constantly growing field, it is to be appreciated, but it is not absolute truth. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dedhorse.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
AlphaTea said:
[ QUOTE ]
lightnix said:
I'm really looking forwards to the new Thunderbirds movie this summer. Anybody else going to see it ?

[/ QUOTE ]

If its about those Air Force Jets, I'll be there!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm... this is a little odd to be discussing in this thread, but... I think I'd rather see the puppet Thunderbirds. You can always see the Air Force ones at air shows.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Turt said:
Science is a growing study that will never end, therefore science is never an absolute truth. To take it as absolute truth is have faith in it as truth... Science is a constantly growing field, it is to be appreciated, but it is not absolute truth.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you... one of the basic tenets in science is refining or even discarding theories in response to new data. But we go with the current working theory - we don't discard not only our theories, but our observations because we interpret the Bible as saying something else - it is just as likely, if not more likely, that a specific interpretation of the Bible is incorrect.
 
all we have is evidence.

there is loads of evidence for loads of things. evidence can be interpreted in various ways, and that's how we get various beliefs.

personally, i believe in the short-time creation theory. there is plenty of evidence to suggest it as a valid theory, just as there is evidence that can be interpreted to suggest the long-term creation theory, or even evolution.

the problem with a lot of the evidence, is that much of it isn't accurate, and what's worse, some of it can seem to be promoting both theories.

it's not like finding the murder weapon with prints in someones garbage can, theres a lot more to it than that...
 
[ QUOTE ]
Greymage said:
The universe is also the testament of its Creator. When scientists explain how the universe works, they are revealing the testament of God.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well said, Greyimage. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

The intense spiritual high of scientific discoverty is not recognized by most people. Geology was a major high for me- walking through billions of years of history can best be described as a mystical experience. No savior required.
 
Layers of strata taking millions of years to deposit, look at this wall, 20-30 feet high many layers. Showing how old the earth is. Oops, this was laid down in weeks you say!?! By the aftermath of Mt St Hellens? So a catastrophe like the Flood (Noah's /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif ) could make things like the Grand Canyon and layers of strata?
I guess it depends on how you start off, if your base is a faith in young earth creation you can see the ways God has created what we see in >10k years.
If you start off with a faith in evolution and needing millions of years, you see things as old.

Those of us who have a faith in a young earth creation see an old earth as being contrary to Genesis. Adam and Eve brought death into God's Creation due to their disobedience. Death prior to that time would not be part of a "good creation". (poorly expressed but that's the general idea)
 
Thanks Turt, Not directly. I have enjoyed Ken Ham since he first appeared in the USA with the Institute for Creation Research.
My salvation is based on Christ. That said I would probably not be a Christian now if it hadn't been for a preacher who addressed my 'scientific' upbringing with answers from the Bible and the world around us. I can now celebrate my risen Savior and His creation.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Wits' End said:
Those of us who have a faith in a young earth creation see an old earth as being contrary to Genesis. Adam and Eve brought death into God's Creation due to their disobedience. Death prior to that time would not be part of a "good creation". (poorly expressed but that's the general idea)

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on, guys. You mean that your preacher brainwashed you with bible myths. Even the Catholic Church rules that the bible is not be read in a literal manner. Do you really believe that woman is created from the rib of man? Do you really believe that Jonah lived for weeks in the belly of a whale? And as for Noah's arc...

*Do you really believe that Noah went around the ancient world collecting male & female specimens of every creature? How would he get close enough to a Bengal Tiger to determine it's sex? Have you ever tried to catch even a small, common wild creature like a gray squirrel?

*How did he collect North American Plains Buffalo and transport them back to the holy lands when no one had even discovered the Americas as that time? And other creatures from the Americas like timber wolves, elk, wolverines, Alaskan Grizzly bears, Florida Crocodiles? How would you approach these animals to determine their sex? You are claiming that Noah caught and transported a complete set of animals from the Americas in a feat that even a modern zoo would view as impossible. Oh, did I forget Polar Bears and 2,000 pound walruses?

*And how about Antarctic wildlife. How did Noah get to the Antarctic? And he apparently collected and transported a whole set of the different Penguin variations from Antarctica back to his arc?

*And how about African wildlife- Cape Buffaloes, African Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Mountain Gorillas, African elephants. So he just went down to Africa and caught these animals and they just lined up and dociley followed Noah back to the ark, huh? And Noah even had them separated by sex, too, eh?

*OK and all this would require an ark the size of New York City to house all these animals. How about feeding the predators like Siberian Tigers- you know these animals feed on other animals, right? Where would Noah keep the Purina Gorilla chow? And how would he keep these animals from eating each other alive?

*And how about North America Beavers? They would chew their way out of any wooden cage that Noah built.

*How about after the flood? And just how would Noah transport all these animals back to their native habitats all over the earth? And what sort of transportation would he have used? Surely, he would not have just released dangerous animals like Grizzly Bears and African Lions in the holy land?

Really, guys. These old bible fables are stories for children. Get a grip. If you want to believe your bible has relevant moral lessons for today....OK. But it's not a guide to literal history and your Preacher surely knows that.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Wits' End said:
Layers of strata taking millions of years to deposit, look at this wall, 20-30 feet high many layers. Showing how old the earth is. Oops, this was laid down in weeks you say!?! By the aftermath of Mt St Hellens? So a catastrophe like the Flood (Noah's /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif ) could make things like the Grand Canyon and layers of strata?
I guess it depends on how you start off, if your base is a faith in young earth creation you can see the ways God has created what we see in >10k years.
If you start off with a faith in evolution and needing millions of years, you see things as old.


[/ QUOTE ]

There are multiple lines of evidence for an old universe other than geology (for example, being able to see stars millions and billions of light years away). As far as the geological evidence goes - do oil companies use young earth or scientific theories to look for oil? Do you think they care about anything other than which one works better? Specifically, if you are at all open to the idea that your interpretation of the Bible is incorrect, here is an article comparing and contrasting the old and young earth theories of formation of the Grand Canyon.

As far as "faith" in science... that is not the same as faith in a specific belief. I know science works because I can do it, and I can see the tangible results. The faith of religion is untestable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top