Getting over our love for Darwin

[Winman]

Well, for the record, I accept the Genesis account as scripturally true.

But to your question, whether it's Genesis, or any other book in scripture, all of scripture is true. But whether a passage was intended to be literal, figurative, allegorical, etc, depends on context. For example, in Song of Soloman, the author says that his lover is the most beautiful of all woman. That's obviously incorrect. Everyone knows that my wife is the most beautiful of all women. :wavey:

My point is that we can argue whether Genesis is literally true or not, but when a person accuses someone who doesn't accept a 6x24 literal creation model of not being a Christian, it speaks more of the accuser's faith than it does the accused.

What are you saying? Do you believe the six day creation account to be literal? Do you believe God created everything after it's kind from the beginning in six days, or do you believe that the many species we have today evolved from an original parent over billions of years as evolution teaches?

And what do you mean by scripturally true? What does that mean?

 

[Johnv]

This isn't about me. Let's not get hijacked. Look, all I want to know is an answer to my question:

If a person doesn't accept a 6x24 literal creation model, they're not Christian?

 

[Winman]

This isn't about me. Let's not get hijacked. Look, all I want to know is an answer to my question:

If a person doesn't accept a 6x24 literal creation model, they're not Christian?

Nice. You completely avoid the question. I don't mind telling you that I believe the creation account in Genesis literal. I believe God created life after it's kind in six, literal, 24 hour days, and I mean just like the 24 hour days we have now. And I believe Adam lived a real 930 years, and I mean the very same years we have now meaning the exact amount of time.

Why don't you answer the question? How can a person discuss this issue with you if they don't understand your perspective?

And you also failed to answer the questions I asked before. If a person does not believe the six day creation account in Genesis to be literal, then how does a person determine which parts of scripture are literal? Perhaps the account of Christ is not literal, how does a person tell?

 

[Johnv]

Nice. You completely avoid the question.

Before you get all high and mighty, I'm the one who asked the question:

"So, if a person doesn't accept a 6x24 literal creation model, they're not Christian?"

and it's being completely avoided.

 

[Winman]

Before you get all high and mighty, I'm the one who asked the question:

"So, if a person doesn't accept a 6x24 literal creation model, they're not Christian?"

and it's being completely avoided.

Well, I can't say. Believing on Jesus Christ is what is needed for salvation, and only God knows the hearts of men.

But I will say this, Jesus himself confirmed that he believed the creation account in Genesis.

Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Jesus here was speaking of men, not animals. The Pharisees had just asked him if it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife. And Jesus said God made men and women from the beginning of creation. This absolutely disagrees with evolution that says life has existed for nearly 5 billion years and that man is very recent, only evolving in the last several million years. So, comparing the last couple of million years versus 5 billion, it could hardly be said that man was created in the beginning of the creation as Jesus believed.

So, at the very least, if a person does not believe in the 6 X 24 creation account, they have themselves disagreeing with the very words of Jesus.

And if you do not believe Jesus was correct here, then where else was he mistaken?

Or do you believe God misleading? God says the world was created in six days when he really meant billions of years? He couldn't have just told us that directly? And God is even more misleading by saying men like Adam lived 930 years?

So, God loves us and wants to save us, but he gives us his word in scriptures that cannot be understood? Is it all a big riddle we have to figure out? And just how do you figure it out?

I hope you can tell me, as our very souls depend on this information.

 

[Johnv]

Well, I can't say. Believing on Jesus Christ is what is needed for salvation, and only God knows the hearts of men.

So, whether a professing Christian believes that the earth was created 6000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or [insert number here] years ago, that in and of itself is not an indicator of a person's salvation. I'm glad we agree, and I hope others do as well.

And if you do not believe Jesus was correct here, then where else was he mistaken?

A discerning Christian will not claim Jesus was mistaken, based on their view of the Genesis account. If a person claims Jesus was mistaken, then that person is mistaken, regardless of their views of scripture.

 

[Winman]

So, whether a professing Christian believes that the earth was created 6000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or [insert number here] years ago, that in and of itself is not an indicator of a person's salvation. I'm glad we agree, and I hope others do as well.

A discerning Christian will not claim Jesus was mistaken, based on their view of the Genesis account. If a person claims Jesus was mistaken, then that person is mistaken, regardless of their views of scripture.

OK, I agree with you that Jesus is never mistaken, that was a poor choice of words.

But I still ask you, when the scriptures say that God created all the universe, and all life on earth in six days, how do you understand this?

 

[Johnv]

But I still ask you, when the scriptures say that God created all the universe, and all life on earth in six days, how do you understand this?

I've never had a problem discerning scripture. I don't require the scientific world to align with my discernment of scripture. When I talk about Adam, the Garden, etc, I know what I'm referring to: The first man, and his fall. I don't rely on science for my spiritual food. I likewise don't rely on scripture for my scientific food. For example, if the Star of Bethlehem was a planetary conjunction, then it was still a miracle. If the miracle of the loaves and fishes can be explained scientifically, it was still a miracle.

So when someone asks me if I believe the world was created in six days, I say yes, because that's a true statement. If someone asks me if it's possible for the evidence to show a world that is billions of years old, I say, sure, it's possible for God to have created the world to look like however He wanted the world to look like. And that likewise is a true statement. God can create the world however He wants. I don't need science and religion to intertwine to have a comprehension of both. But that's just me. Others require it, and that's fine to. I'm not going to try to convince them they're wrong, neither am I going to judge their faith over it.

 

[Winman]

I've never had a problem discerning scripture. I don't require the scientific world to align with my discernment of scripture. When I talk about Adam, the Garden, etc, I know what I'm referring to: The first man, and his fall. I don't rely on science for my spiritual food. I likewise don't rely on scripture for my scientific food. For example, if the Star of Bethlehem was a planetary conjunction, then it was still a miracle. If the miracle of the loaves and fishes can be explained scientifically, it was still a miracle.

So when someone asks me if I believe the world was created in six days, I say yes. If someone asks me if it's possible for the evidence to show a world that is billions of years old, I say, sure, it's possible for God to have created the world to look like however He wanted the world to look like. God can create the world however He wants. I don't need science and religion to intertwine to have a comprehension of both. But that's just me. Others require it, and that's fine to. I'm not going to try to convince them they're wrong, neither am I going to judge their faith over it.

You should consider running for politics. That was a whole bunch about nothing.

Why can't you just say what you believe? You say if someone asks you if the world was created in six days, you say yes. Then you say if someone asks if there is evidence to show a world that is billions of years old you say yes.

So, if I get your meaning, you believe the universe was created in six days, but that God makes it appear as though it took billions of years. Wouldn't that make God slightly dishonest and misleading?

Why would God do that? This would throw doubt upon his very word which he has commanded us to believe. We are saved by believing what God has said and done for us, and then God himself would cast doubt on his own words by making the scientific evidence appear contrary to his word?

Gotta tell ya, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Could it be, is is possible, that man has misinterpreted the evidence?

 

[Johnv]

Why can't you just say what you believe? You say if someone asks you if the world was created in six days, you say yes. Then you say if someone asks if there is evidence to show a world that is billions of years old you say yes.

That's correct. I don't need them to reconcile.

So, if I get your meaning, you believe the universe was created in six days, but that God makes it appear as though it took billions of years.

I believe that's certainly possible for God to have done. Yes.

Wouldn't that make God slightly dishonest and misleading?

No, I think it means that God's creation is greater than we can undersand, but since we dont' need to understand it, I'm fine with that. Scripture says the sun rises, but in actuality, the sun appear to rise. Does that mean God is being slightly dishonest? No, it just means we see it rise from where God intended us to see it. The sun still rises.

Gotta tell ya, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

It doesn't need to. I don't pretend that it does. I don't need to understand everything to accept scripture as true.

Could it be, is is possible, that man has misinterpreted the evidence?

Sure. It's also possible that man has misinterpreted the Word. The Word would still be true.

 

[Winman]

That's correct. I don't need them to reconcile.

I believe that's certainly possible for God to have done. Yes.

No, I think it means that God's creation is greater than we can undersand, but since we dont' need to understand it, I'm fine with that. Scripture says the sun rises, but in actuality, the sun appear to rise. Does that mean God is being slightly dishonest? No, it just means we see it rise from where God intended us to see it. The sun still rises.

It doesn't need to. I don't pretend that it does. I don't need to understand everything to accept scripture as true.

Sure. It's also possible that man has misinterpreted the Word. The Word would still be true.

I have to strongly disagree with you. It is imperative we understand God's word. Do you realize that the eternal state of your soul rests solely on God's word? We are saved by faith, by trust in God's word.

Psa 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

God says all his works are done in truth. So he is not going to give you a false impression or evidence of his works.

Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

How can anyone say the laws and testimonies of God are sure when you can't be sure about them?

Psa 119:144 The righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting: give me understanding, and I shall live.

How can we understand something that cannot be understood if your reasoning be true?

John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Jesus said we shall know the truth. You say that is not really possible and that you are not even concerned about it.

God is not misleading. He is a God of perfect truth. Where men disagree with God, I will listen to God's word.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Since you want to read more into my statement than was intended, I will try to explain more simply. Evolution has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the creation. God SPOKE everything into existence. He created full grown animals who reproduced "after their own kind." He created a full grown man and woman with intelligence since Adam named all the animals. Nothing evolved from a lower form and still doesn't to this day.

While there is such a thing as mutations and new life forms appearing through different but compatible species mating and producing offspring different from both parents, an ape evolving into a human after millions of years has never and will never happen.

Whether or not anyone is born again (as Jesus said we must be, "Ye must be born again") is something that only God knows--and hopefully those people who are born again, too. I KNOW that I am born again despite the fact that I'm far from being perfect. I will be one day, though, when I'm called home. We also told in God's word that we can know that we are born again.

 

[Johnv]

I have to strongly disagree with you.

I respect that.

It is imperative we understand God's word.

I agree. But let's not kid ourselves to think we fully understand it. Otherwise, there would not be debates over calvinism/arminianism, millenialism, and a whole course of other topics. Genesis literalism is another one of those topics, and is not in and of itself a litmus test for whether or not someone believes the Bible.

Do you realize that the eternal state of your soul rests solely on God's word? We are saved by faith, by trust in God's word.

Of course I understand it. But we've already established that how well someone understands the Word is not a litmus test for whether someone believes it, or whether someone is saved or not.

Where men disagree with God, I will listen to God's word.

As do I. But I don't pretend to think men disagreeing with men about God is the same as men disagreeing with God. And I certainly don't need to have all my questions wrapped up with a bow to be assured salvation, or to believe in scripture.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

All too often, people get their pet doctrines confused with requirements for being reconciled to God.

 

[Winman]

I agree. But let's not kid ourselves to think we fully understand it. Otherwise, there would not be debates over calvinism/arminianism, millenialism, and a whole course of other topics. Genesis literalism is another one of those topics, and is not in and of itself a litmus test for whether or not someone believes the Bible.

Of course I understand it. But we've already established that how well someone understands the Word is not a litmus test for whether someone believes it, or whether someone is saved or not.

As do I. But I don't pretend to think men disagreeing with men about God is the same as men disagreeing with God. And I certainly don't need to have all my questions wrapped up with a bow to be assured salvation, or to believe in scripture.

John, I do not believe anyone understands 100% of the Bible. And it is true that men disagree on doctrine. But that does not mean we cannot know and understand most of the scriptures.

Prov 8:9 They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.

I personally do not see the Genesis creation account as a very controversial passage. It is pretty plain and straightforward. God said he created the heavens and the earth in six days. Now, if you want to assign great ages to these days you have a problem, for each day is described as having an evening and a morning.

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

If you are going to argue that each day was a long period of time such as a billion years, then you would have to also attach a long period to each evening and morning. This would make it pretty difficult for plant life to survive, especially when plant life was created on day three but the sun was not created until day four.

Gen 3:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

So, there is nothing in scripture to indicate these six days described in Genesis were anything other than six ordinary 24 hour days that we enjoy now. If you can supply scripture that would argue these were long periods of time, then you might have a case.

And just because two people disagree on doctrine does not mean one person cannot be correct and the other wrong.

And just because people disagree on scripture does not mean that the scriptures cannot be rightly understood, and that someone cannot be in disagreement with God. If a person does not agree with God's own interpretation of his own word, then that person is indeed in disagreement with God. So that is not a valid argument whatsoever.

 

[Johnv]

John, I do not believe anyone understands 100% of the Bible. And it is true that men disagree on doctrine. But that does not mean we cannot know and understand most of the scriptures.

I agree.

If you are going to argue...

I'm not arguing anything. I'm simply saying that just because one doesn't agree on an understanding of Genesis, doesn't mean that one person "believes the Bible" and the other doesn't. I say this because Genesis nonliteralists frequently get accused of "not believing the bible", which is usually an unrighteous and inaccurate accusation. My original comment wasn't to argue Genesis1, it was to denote the inappropriateness of judging a person's belief in scripture based on one's view of Gen1.

And just because two people disagree on doctrine does not mean one person cannot be correct and the other wrong.

And I guarantee you, the Calvinist will say the Arminian is wrong, and the Arminian will say the Calvinist is wrong. Does either understand scripture less than the other? Probably not. Does each understand scripture fully? No. Does one believe the Bible less than the other? Not likely.

 

[Winman]

And I guarantee you, the Calvinist will say the Arminian is wrong, and the Arminian will say the Calvinist is wrong. Does either understand scripture less than the other? Probably not. Does each understand scripture fully? No. Does one believe the Bible less than the other? Not likely.

The person who is in error indubitably understands the scriptures less than the one who is correct on doctrine.

Mark 12:18 Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,

Mark 12:27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Both the Pharisees and Sadducees erred on doctrine, but the Pharisees were not in error on the resurrection, while the Sadducees were. So, the Sadducees were in greater error, at least on this specific topic.

Just because people disagree does not mean the truth cannot be found and understood. Read the first several chapters of Proverbs where God exhorts us to study and seek after understanding and wisdom. God would not command us to do this if everything was supposed to be kept secret from us. Yes, there are some things not revealed to us, but the creation account is not one of them, the whole first chapter of Genesis is about nothing else.

Prov 2:1 My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;
2 So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding;
3 Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;
4 If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;
5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.

Not only can we know much of scripture and understand it, God promises if we truly will listen to him and seek knowledge he will reveal it to us.

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.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.

If you know of scripture that supports a long time period for the creation, then show it. Until then, I will believe God made the heavens and the earth and everything that is in them in six days as he said. If God had taken a long time to create the universe, he could have easily said so. Why not just take him at his word?

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

I have no problem believing God made the universe in six days, he could have made it all in an instant. He used six days as a pattern and sign for us.