In the Beginning....

[Darrenss1]

this assumes that all things were then as they are now. Which we know to be false. Man did not die until sin nor was his body being corrupted. That has changed since the fall. Your assumption is not valid.

Old argument but if God created man immortal what was the tree of life for? After the fall Adam and Eve could still eat the fruit of the tree of life and live forever. That is why death via sin is spiritual death not physical death. Creation groans because of the sin of mankind effects all of creation, for that reason.

Darren

 

[Jedi Knight]

However, all truth is God's truth and therefore true science will never contradict the Scriptures.

.

Really? So can science observe a miracle?

 

[Jedi Knight]

I saw that debate as well.
As a side note, Kent Hovind is now in prison for fraud I believe. That does not mean anything against other young earthers, but it does say a lot about Hovind's arrogance.

Funny,your very first post was pretty smug towards other believers view on the topic saying "It makes us a laughing stock in the scientific community".

 

[Darrenss1]

Really? So can science observe a miracle?

That's not what he meant, you are splitting hairs for no reason. If the christian worldview exists in the real world, this reality, than the laws of science would not contradict the scriptures, given someones interpretation may contradict but the laws will hold true. Miracles are to the exlcusions of scientific law that's why they are refered to as "supernatural".

Darren

 

[annsni]

So science is truth? Science is never wrong?

 

[Jedi Knight]

Yes, "yom" standing all alone COULD mean "age". However, it is not alone. It is with an ordinal number. We don't say "there was evening and there was morning, the first age". That makes no sense whatsoever, does it? How does an age have an evening and morning?

This is so easy to see. I think the problem is the lack of knowing "or remembering" God's power was involved and made things mature w/age already. That's why I think it's boarderline next to evolutions view...and that's dangerous. Evolution depends on extra time to explain away things....so does an old earth view.

 

[Revmitchell]

Old argument but if God created man immortal what was the tree of life for? After the fall Adam and Eve could still eat the fruit of the tree of life and live forever. That is why death via sin is spiritual death not physical death. Creation groans because of the sin of mankind effects all of creation, for that reason.

Darren

Your statement here is not clear and you try again?

 

[Darrenss1]

So science is truth? Science is never wrong?

Science changes but the word of God has never. That is IF you define science as something at which man can observe and reproduce and demonstrate, this requires interpretation as you know. But the laws of science itself such as mathematics, laws of physics (such as entropy, cause and effect, photosynthesis..etc) generally are set and do not contradict scripture. God sitting above the circle of the earth has always been true regardless of what man through the progress of science has ever thought. Intelligent design is another topic that backs up how the universe fits into the christian worldview.

Darren

 

[Darrenss1]

Your statement here is not clear and you try again?

Which part is not clear?

Darren

 

[Jedi Knight]

Miracles are to the exlcusions of scientific law that's why they are refered to as "supernatural".

Darren

And this is why scripture can trump science!:thumbs:

 

[Tom Bryant]

I will always go with the Bible, Brother Tom. Always.

However, all truth is God's truth and therefore true science will never contradict the Scriptures.

Old Earth does not as many VERY reputable Christian scholars purport. Norman Geisler, for example, is a tremendously respected Southern Baptist Apologist and he believes that the Scriptures teach an old earth.

John Phillips believes this as well.

According to Dr. Walter Kaiser, one of the translators of the NKJV, the word for "day" in the hebrew, yom, is found in the Authorized version 508 times. Of those it is rendered 58 different ways.

Yom does not, by any means, denote a 24 hour day.

Therefore, it is actually the traditionalists who are forcing that upon the text in Genesis 1.

We have done this for centuries. The church gets used to a certain position that the Bible really does not teach, then science discovers that position is wrong (not that the Bible is wrong mind you but that the mistaken position is). Then thinking Christians go to the text and say, "Well, does the Scripture actually teach the traditional position?" They then find out that the traditional position is actually NOT taught in Scripture and they actually discover that science is not contradicting the Scripture but confirming it.

This was the case with the geocentric (earth centered) position, flat earth and others.

As we look into the Scriptures in light of these scientific discoveries we find to our amazement that indeed the Word of God was teaching that all along.

But that is not to say that even ancient Christians did not consider the possibility of an old earth. St. Augustine waffled back and forth on the idea finally taking a young earth position but allowing for the fair interpretation of Genesis 1 as an old earth. Many other Christians in church history held the Old Earth position as well. Isaac Newton, for example.

So you would insist that against scientific "knowledge" that the earth is old. I congratulate you on taking the Scripture above science.

But I would imagine that you know as well as I that the "facts" of science have changed over the years. What I was taught in HS biology (btw, my science teacher believed in what she called theistic evolution) in 1967 is laughed at now. In 100 years the facts of science will have changed again.

Again, I could not care less about what Augustine or Kaiser or even those theologians who believe in a young earth teach. I couldn't care less about what science teaches. I know it sounds wonderful to use the old line that all truth is God's truth. But current scientific knowledge is not truth in any eternal sense because of its' changeable nature. So it is really not God's truth.

I think you are on a slippery slope that leads to acceptance of science above Scripture. You say you're not even on that hill. I hope not.

But I have lived long enough to see preachers and pastors who one time used that line of all truth is God's truth now accepting homosexuality as a life style because science now says it's a hereditary predisposition and that too must be God's truth.

Please don't take me wrong, I am not saying you are there. I just fear you're on that journey. I just would rather accept what I see as the literal teaching of Genesis 1 and 2.

 

[Darrenss1]

And this is why scripture can trump science!:thumbs:

Yes however I don't believe God has placed mankind in a universe where logical impossibilities are considered the norm. Therefore the universe God placed mankind in follows a set of natural laws that are consistent and observable. The natural laws don't apply to God.

Darren

 

[Jedi Knight]

Yes however I don't believe God has placed mankind in a universe where logical impossibilities are considered the norm. Darren

Creating the universe and all in 6-24 hr days is not the norm.

 

[Darrenss1]

But current scientific knowledge is not truth in any eternal sense because of its' changeable nature. So it is really not God's truth.
I think you are on a slippery slope that leads to acceptance of science above Scripture. You say you're not even on that hill. I hope not.

Can I just clear up this fact. I define science or natural law as a design aspect of the universe created or set in motion by God regardless of whether or not it is actually known by mankind. The study of sciences is to find out what IS not that they are inventing anything but to simply know what already exists in physics, medicine, cosmology..etc This is where the confusion is. If God created the universe and all life than everything scientist are observing and studing is the product of the work of God. They will not study something that God was not responsible for, therefore "science" will not uncover anything contrary to God or inconsistant with scripture.

Darren

 

[Darrenss1]

Creating the universe and all in 6-24 hr days is not the norm.

God rested from creation and left the universe to the natural laws He put in place. That is the norm.

Darren

 

[Revmitchell]

Can I just clear up this fact. I define science or natural law as a design aspect of the universe created or set in motion by God regardless of whether or not it is actually known by mankind. The study of sciences is to find out what IS not that they are inventing anything but to simply know what already exists in physics, medicine, cosmology..etc This is where the confusion is. If God created the universe and all life than everything scientist are observing and studing is the product of the work of God. They will not study something that God was not responsible for, therefore "science" will not uncover anything contrary to God or inconsistant with scripture.

Darren

Science and its methods of observation are man made. They are never devoid of man's influence or agenda. And in recent history science has become nothing more than a political tool.

We need to understand creation in light of scripture rather than "science".

 

[Luke2427]

Gen 3:14 The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.
Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."
Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you."
Gen 3:17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
Gen 3:18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
Gen 3:20 The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Gen 3:21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.



Rom 8:19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God.
Rom 8:20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope
Rom 8:21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

I'm quite familiar with those passage Brother Mitchel. Most of us who have been preaching any length of time can quote them from memory. But they don't teach that nothing could die on earth before the fall. They only teach that the world of men saw the entrance of death at the fall and ever since the whole of creation has been suffering for man's sinfulness. The earth wishes to be relieved of this plague called fallen man and groans after such.
One day she will. When the earth is made a new she will no longer have to host the sinful hordes of humanity. She groans for that day.

But there is not a single passage of Scripture that teaches that plants and animals did not die before Adam. As a matter of fact I have already proven with Genesis 1:12 that it teaches the opposite.

 

[Luke2427]

Funny,your very first post was pretty smug towards other believers view on the topic saying "It makes us a laughing stock in the scientific community".

????????????

 

[Revmitchell]

But there is not a single passage of Scripture that teaches that plants and animals did not die before Adam. As a matter of fact I have already proven with Genesis 1:12 that it teaches the opposite.

Ok in your view break it (this passage) down for me. How did you get to the point that you believe it teaches this?

 

[Revmitchell]

????????????

He is right. Very "snotty"