Evidence for God from Science

zoegirl wrote:Irq conflict.

It does seem like you use scripture to imply that those of us who support OEC are somehow compromising God's word.

irqconflict wrote: I just wanted to point out that old earth creationists tend to ignore context and cut and paste scripture to fit within the confines of what they believe to be true. ie 'presuppose'

How in the world can this be taken any other way other than a slap in the face of our faith and understanding of Gods word?

By the same token, am I supposed to tell you that because you believe first that the earth is billions of years old that it's ok to interpret Genesis to fit that OEC model? ie Yom out of context and ignore the ordinal numbers.

I would be intellectually bankrupt if I did that.

Then for any debate, you bring up scripture as if that then implies that if only we would read scripture we would get the point! ALl of the scripture you bring up is fine, great, wonderful, and I agree with it all! But we can use these scripture verses as well. My point is, why should these verses be exclusively for YEC?

Again you accuse me. Go back to those Scriptures and re read them and then read my post as to why I used those Scriptures. I cannot be held responsible for how you take something out of context in which it was put forth. Scripture should be used to instruct and edify. Why you choose not to use Scripture to bolster your position is your decision not mine.

YEs, I react strongly, because you charge that we do not lift God up to the same arena that YEC'ers do.

In reality, only one of our positions on Genesis can be correct right?

If you truly do not hold to this, then gladly will I back off, but I've not seen anything to say that you think we are on equal footing.

My belief that your interpretation of Genesis is wrong in no way says we are unequal.

And being a good steward means that you have to understand what you are stewards over.

Yes. The Earth.

Rev 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

How can we be good stewards of the earth, its resources, and its creatures, our bodies, our planet, our environment unless we seek to understand God's established rules and laws of these?

How then was it possible for the previous thousands of years without scientific discovery to be good stewards?

Adam and Eve were given a mandate to be stewards over the creation. Does that not mean that they were supposed to learn and understand to the best of their ability God's creation?

Do I need to be a mechanic to take care of my car? A carpenter to take care of my house? The answer is simple. The designers give you the necessary information to maintain the items which you have. Not that I have to learn everything there is to know about those items.

Being a good steward of the earth simply means not destroying abusing or wasting it and follow the Word on how God wants His property to be taken care of.

We don't doubt this principle with money...everybody understands that to be good stewards of our money means that we should understand how to use money and the principles of interest, etc.

So why should our responsibility to God's creation be any different?

Because God did not apply the same rules to the stewardship of the earth with regards to usury and tithes and offerings.

Our responsibility begins and ends with what God Ordained.

dad wrote: You know, I used to have a quiver of respect when I heard the name Augustine. Don't know why, I guess he is well known, or something. The more I hear from the guy, the less respect I have for anything he has to say. I can't recall a single quote from the guy I liked. Not that I read much about him, but from when people quote him.
Anyhow, the question remains, was the old ages thing widely accepted, even in the catholic church?

Augustine wrote:I would not believe in the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church

Origen has always been controversial. His reported self-mutilation, in response to Matthew 19:12 ("… there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven….") was condemned as a drastic misinterpretation of the text. In Palestine he preached without being ordained and was so condemned by his bishop, Demetrius. When on a second trip, he was ordained by the same bishops who had invited him to speak the first time, Demetrius sent him into exile.

Origen did teach that all spirits were created equal, existed before birth, and then fell from grace. Furthermore, "those rational beings who sinned and on account fell from the state in which they were, in proportion to their particular sins, were enslaved in bodies as punishment"—some demons, some men, and some angels. He also believed that all spirits, even Satan, could be saved. "The power of choosing between good and evil is within the reach of all," he wrote.

Most notably, however, Origen described the Trinity as a hierarchy, not as an equality of Father, Son, and Spirit. And though he attacked Gnostic beliefs, like them, he rejected the goodness of material creation.

Christ and the Apostles believed there were people on the earth from the beginning (not billions of years after the beginning):

* Jesus told the Pharisees in Mark 10:6, “But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.” Not billions of years after the beginning of creation.
* Jesus says in Luke 11:50-51, “:so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Able to the blood of Zechariah:” Jesus obviously believed his first prophet, Able, was there at the beginning — the foundation of the world. Not billions of years after it had been set into motion.
* Jesus also said of Satan in John 8:44, “He was a murderer from the beginning,” making reference to Cain's murder of his brother Able.
* Jesus prophesies about the tribulation in Mark 13:19, “For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of creation that God created until now.” According to Jesus, there has been some measure of tribulation since the beginning. If man didn't enter the picture until billions of years after the beginning, then what was the object of this tribulation?
* Paul writes to the Romans in 1:20, “For his invisible attributes, namely his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world.” First, for the attributes to have been perceived from creation there must have been someone to perceive them. Secondly, this is another passage that supports the idea that the creation is there to point us to God. Why have it sit undergoing mindless processes for billions of years before man is on the scene to marvel at it?
* I Peter 1:20 and Revelation 13:8, 17:8 speak of the Lamb that was slain or the names that were written in the Lamb's Book of Life from the foundation of the world. What purpose could God have in billions of years of death and decay before his redemptive plan for man was set into motion. The elect were obviously elected from the foundation, why wait?

zoegirl wrote:And thus you see why I react so strongly.

YOu accuse us of compromising scripture.

You use scripture as if it solely supports your position,

as if it your your sole posession for defense and apologetics.

NONE of those scriptures points to a unique case of YEC.

They point to the mysterious and glorious nature of God, unfathomable. Point to me ONE scripture verse that you have used (other than Genesis of course) that even ADDRESSES the age of the universe.

You haven't even addressed the fact that the Hebrew CAN be interpreted differently, or at most only give lip service to it.

Still insisting that we ignore scripture at the whim of science, completely ignoring that this is GOD'S creation we are talking about.

YOu insist that we go to to science first.

I'll say it again and again. This is God's creation we are talking about! We look at both God's creation and His word and look to see harmony.

You have completely ignored the examples I have provided, only stating fact that they FINALLY stopped using the moon dust example and yet are continuing with at least 15 other misuses of data. DAta which has firm constants behind. You ever wonder WHY it took them so long to give up moon dust?

jenwat3 wrote:Everyone here has interesting points about when the earth was created. The bible says seven days. But God also says "one day is like a thousand years". Would it be possible that it took 7 thousand years to create the earth instead of 7 days? Again, only a question, I don't know the answer. It doesn't really matter to me anyway how long it took. All that's really important to me is that He created it. It really should'nt matter how long it took.

jenwat3 wrote:Again, does it really matter how long it took for the earth to be created? If it does then WHY? Shouldn't it simply matter that it was?

IRQ Conflict wrote:..
This might be why:

"Augustine"I would not believe in the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church"

Again we have the Satanic idea of man over God.

I found some really bizzar behavior in the writings of Origen:

jenwat3 wrote:Everyone here has interesting points about when the earth was created. The bible says seven days. But God also says "one day is like a thousand years". Would it be possible that it took 7 thousand years to create the earth instead of 7 days? Again, only a question, I don't know the answer. It doesn't really matter to me anyway how long it took. All that's really important to me is that He created it. It really should'nt matter how long it took.

jenwat3 wrote:Again, does it really matter how long it took for the earth to be created? If it does then WHY? Shouldn't it simply matter that it was?