• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Pat Robertson Calls creationist "Ignorant!"

quantumfaith

Active Member
While Jesus spoke the following words in response to Nicodemus' failure to understandinb being "born again," He could have just as easily said them following your comment.
John 3, NASB
1 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?"​
Who understand the language of quantum mechanics and physics well, other than someone schooled deeply in those fields? Yet we have texts that attempt to simplify some of those concepts to be understood by the layman. Did you want God to command Moses to get a Ph.D in quantum mechanics so he could understand God's words in describing a technically detailed manual laying out the creation? Or should we be glad and feel blessed that God chose not to go into great detail for the sake of 1) brevity, and 2) focus.

Hint: His focus wasn't to teach us quantum mechanics. It was to teach us about Him. Nonetheless, He had Moses choose very deliberately from the words he could write to describe the creation, to point us in the right direction. Scientists who reject the Genesis creation have chosen to look in the wrong direction.


Well let me say, I have a VERY shallow understanding of quantum physics and mathematics. I only know enough to be dangerous. :) I do know, much controversy within the world of physics accompanied this 'new idea", but it has withstood the the tests of time and mathematical predictability.

You are so correct, the intent of scripture in the creation narrative was absolutely NOT to teach such concepts, it was rather, (IMO) to instruct, relative to other creation narratives, that the ONE responsible for the cosmos, was in fact the one and only true God, YHWH.
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
What does this have to do with the fact that God said that He created the world in 6 days? Or that Jesus confirmed this? That Adam was the first man, created from the dust of the earth - not from the genes of an ape?

My intent, obviously poorly communicated, is that I do not think that the creation narrative has the intent of an instruction or science manual, but rather to communicate the theological truth, that all we see and experience in the cosmos, the heavens, the earth, life and humanity are the result of the creative acts of YHWH.
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
Listen, if you "all" will feel "better" I will be happy to renounce my BB membership and depart. Then you will not have to exposed to positions, thoughts, ideas etc. that I share.

Please feel free to PM and let me know.
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Listen, if you "all" will feel "better" I will be happy to renounce my BB membership and depart. Then you will not have to exposed to positions, thoughts, ideas etc. that I share.

Please feel free to PM and let me know.
Don't be silly :smilewinkgrin:

If I can deal with Augustinianism and hyper Calvinism, OE is a trivial matter.
 

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But you think the Lord should have used the Genesis account to explain 13.7 billion years of Cosmic expansion and such to a late stone age, early bronze age person?

Do you understand you are contradicting yourself? Or will you just ignore this as you ignore everything else you cannot understand or fear to consider?

No - He didn't need to use the Genesis account to explain anything other than what He did. What He told us does not allow for these things you have mentioned. An early bronze age person? So Adam was not the first man and Jesus is a liar. Honestly, that's the bottom line. God told us He spoke and it came into existence and there was evening and morning the ___th day. That is quite clear.
 

Baptist4life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No - He didn't need to use the Genesis account to explain anything other than what He did. What He told us does not allow for these things you have mentioned. An early bronze age person? So Adam was not the first man and Jesus is a liar. Honestly, that's the bottom line. God told us He spoke and it came into existence and there was evening and morning the ___th day. That is quite clear.

Amen! :thumbs:
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Perhaps God's chastening of Job will be helpful to the doubters!

Job 38:1-4;
1. Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2. Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3. Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding

31. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32. Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33. Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Perhaps God's chastening of Job will be helpful to the doubters!

Job 38:1-4;
1. Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2. Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3. Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding

31. Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32. Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33. Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

A great big amen to this!!!
and post 85
 
Last edited by a moderator:

percho

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I wonder if there was any, "time," that pasted with the earth being without form and void and darkness upon the face of the deep, before the Spirit moved and God said let there be light?

And God saw the light,
that [it was] good: and God
divided the light from the
darkness.
4
and·he-is-seeing Elohim » the·light that good and·he-is- separating Elohim
between the·light and·between the·darkness ----from Scripture4all.org Hebrew interlinear

It appears the light was good. Was the darkness good also?

Job 30:26 When I looked for good, then evil came unto me: and when I waited for light, there came darkness.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But you think the Lord should have used the Genesis account to explain 13.7 billion years of Cosmic expansion and such to a late stone age, early bronze age person?

Do you understand you are contradicting yourself? Or will you just ignore this as you ignore everything else you cannot understand or fear to consider?

You do realise that there were things constructed and done by those "primitives" abck in those times that we astill cannot fully duplicate, right?

if anything, they would have been SMARTER than us, as less time had passed from the sin event of the fall, and not as much collaterial damage was done!

And they lived almost thousand yeras, imagine their version of an einsten, di vinch etc with that much time to be creative!

And God gave the exact words to moses to record down, correct?

Or in addition to trying to force fed thru bible unproven scirntific assumprions, also have a problem with Inerrancy/insperation also?
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
If there was death prior to the fall, when did suffering and fear come into the picture. It appears fear entered through the fall from the Garden account.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If there was death prior to the fall, when did suffering and fear come into the picture. It appears fear entered through the fall from the Garden account.

yes, for paul linked the fall and the curse from that sin pronounced by God upon his creation/nature right from that event and time!
 

nodak

Active Member
Site Supporter
annsi, I am old earth creationist exactly because I am not a doubter of God's word. He has told us that a day isn't always exactly 24 hours with Him. I believe Him.

I would say among the scripturally accurate possibilities:

1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.

2. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says, only the days could be "specific periods of time but not 24 hour days."

3. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says and with 24 hour days, just much further in the past than young earther's hold. This is sort of my default position, although the 24 hour part is negotiable since I seriously doubt God needed 24 hour periods and He dwells outside our time.

4. Gap theory--this is my second default position. It allows a very literal reading of Genesis, and young earth for the current creation. It also allows a literal reading of scriptures which seem to point to there having been some other creation that fell into chaos. Perhaps when Satan fell and 1/3 of the angels?

5. More and more we realize time as we experience it on earth is not necessarily space time. Since God existed before the universe, Genesis may explain things quite literally by earth time and yet not by God's time or universe time.

So I am not a doubter of God's word. I doubt some theories and some interpretations, but not His word. Of paramount importance to me is the fact that God created everything. I can dwell in peace with those that understand the how and the when differently than I do, as long as they base their beliefs on the Bible. Where I would break fellowship is if they don't believe God created all.
 

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
annsi, I am old earth creationist exactly because I am not a doubter of God's word. He has told us that a day isn't always exactly 24 hours with Him. I believe Him.

So then we know that He was in the grave for more than 3 days as we know it, and He was there for 3000 years.

Or that Israel marched around Jericho for 7000 years.

Hmm - I guess when God says "day" and uses specific words to denote a 24 hour day, maybe we should take Him at His word??

I would say among the scripturally accurate possibilities:

1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.

So when He created man, He created him as a zygote? Otherwise, God lied.

2. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says, only the days could be "specific periods of time but not 24 hour days."

Yes, but grammatically, that theory is not supported.

3. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says and with 24 hour days, just much further in the past than young earther's hold. This is sort of my default position, although the 24 hour part is negotiable since I seriously doubt God needed 24 hour periods and He dwells outside our time.

God doesn't need ANY time- He can create anything any way He wants to - but He told us how He did it and either He's not telling us the truth or we decide He is not telling us the truth.

4. Gap theory--this is my second default position. It allows a very literal reading of Genesis, and young earth for the current creation. It also allows a literal reading of scriptures which seem to point to there having been some other creation that fell into chaos. Perhaps when Satan fell and 1/3 of the angels?

This is slightly more plausable but God tells us that He created everything in 6 days so I need to go with what He said.

5. More and more we realize time as we experience it on earth is not necessarily space time. Since God existed before the universe, Genesis may explain things quite literally by earth time and yet not by God's time or universe time.

But the earth is in earth time as are we and God explained to us in OUR language and in OUR terminology how He created things. We can't say that "and there was evening and morning, the 4th day" and say that is not what it means. In Hebrew, that was very clear: one day.

So I am not a doubter of God's word. I doubt some theories and some interpretations, but not His word. Of paramount importance to me is the fact that God created everything. I can dwell in peace with those that understand the how and the when differently than I do, as long as they base their beliefs on the Bible. Where I would break fellowship is if they don't believe God created all.

But what of death existing before God tells us it began? What of the fact that God and Jesus tell us that Adam was the first man? How could there be mankind before Adam when God said that he was first? If we went by the first chapter of Genesis, we can maybe add in all sorts of stuff but when we look at the whole of scripture, I just don't see how we can interpret it any other way than the way God intended it to be interpreted - and the way that Jesus spoke if it as well.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
annsi, I am old earth creationist exactly because I am not a doubter of God's word. He has told us that a day isn't always exactly 24 hours with Him. I believe Him.

Would say that your main problem in this is that you are attempting to try to accomodate what you are assumed are "proven scintidic fats", which are anything but!

just take a literal reading of genesis, with notice of the Grammar, wording, contex, and there is NO support for Theistic evolution so called, as Jesus said that He created Adam and even in the begginning of the Creation!
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
A day being like a thousand years to God is just that...to God. The Bible was written to man who understood what a day consisted of thousands of years ago and today. Also the appearance of age issue. It is not deceptive to create a tree fully formed, and animals and humans as adults. Its a miracle and supernatural.
 
annsi, I am old earth creationist exactly because I am not a doubter of God's word. He has told us that a day isn't always exactly 24 hours with Him. I believe Him.
So do you believe Him when He tells Moses to use the Hebrew language in writing Genesis 1 that demands a literal interpretation of six standard 24-hour days? Because that's what He did, which puts your conclusion in contradiction to God.
1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.
Good reason to reject it.
2. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says, only the days could be "specific periods of time but not 24 hour days."
What other kind of days are there that could possibly conform to the rules of translating the Hebrew?
3. God could have created the earth exactly as Genesis says and with 24 hour days, just much further in the past than young earther's hold. This is sort of my default position, although the 24 hour part is negotiable since I seriously doubt God needed 24 hour periods and He dwells outside our time.
Except that He would want to provide an example for man's work during daylight hours, which from the account are the only hours He worked.
4. Gap theory--this is my second default position. It allows a very literal reading of Genesis and young earth for the current creation. ...
Except that it requires the translation of white space between vv. 1, 2 or Genesis 1 as an entire second creation, which the rest of the Bible inexplicably ignores completely. Don't you find that strange? I don't think silence can be translated at all, much less in that way.
... It also allows a literal reading of scriptures which seem to point to there having been some other creation that fell into chaos. Perhaps when Satan fell and 1/3 of the angels?
Please tell me where you find that in Scripture. Perhaps those passages are missing from my Bible.
5. More and more we realize time as we experience it on earth is not necessarily space time. Since God existed before the universe, Genesis may explain things quite literally by earth time and yet not by God's time or universe time.
Entirely possible, except that to explain the existence of Earth, one needs to operate in four-dimensional space.
So I am not a doubter of God's word. I doubt some theories and some interpretations, but not His word.
I'm not sure "liberal interpretation of Scripture," which is what you describe herein, can escape the label of "doubter," but I'll give you the benefit of the ... uh ... um ... er ... "doubt"? :laugh:
 

OnlyaSinner

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
1. God could have created an old appearing earth a short time ago. Problem with that is, it basically makes God a deceiver and He flat out isn't. So while it does have the appearance of adhering literally to Genesis, it doesn't adhere literally to the rest of the Bible.

Human science may indeed be deceived about the age of the Earth (that's what I think is the case) but that doesn't make God a deceiver. Rather, I believe that sinful man with his limited knowledge has interpreted and extrapolated the evidence incorrectly in theorizing a big bang +/-14 billion years ago.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So do you believe Him when He tells Moses to use the Hebrew language in writing Genesis 1 that demands a literal interpretation of six standard 24-hour days? Because that's what He did, which puts your conclusion in contradiction to God.Good reason to reject it.What other kind of days are there that could possibly conform to the rules of translating the Hebrew?Except that He would want to provide an example for man's work during daylight hours, which from the account are the only hours He worked.Except that it requires the translation of white space between vv. 1, 2 or Genesis 1 as an entire second creation, which the rest of the Bible inexplicably ignores completely. Don't you find that strange? I don't think silence can be translated at all, much less in that way.Please tell me where you find that in Scripture. Perhaps those passages are missing from my Bible.Entirely possible, except that to explain the existence of Earth, one needs to operate in four-dimensional space.I'm not sure "liberal interpretation of Scripture," which is what you describe herein, can escape the label of "doubter," but I'll give you the benefit of the ... uh ... um ... er ... "doubt"? :laugh:

How about the view that the Lord showed Moses over a period of 6 days what he had done, but was progressive creationism , ages between days?

NOT agreeing with that, but have read that thory!
 
Top