William Lane Craig: Young Earth Creationism is Embarrassing
Jun 12, 2015 00:59:36 #
Jun 12, 2015 01:15:06 #
Jun 12, 2015 11:56:06 #
slocumeddie wrote:
The overall theme in this video attempts to mix or blend science with theology. Francis Collins, the current director of NIH, was mentioned in the video. Collins is an excellent scientist who directed the human genome project, and he is also a devout believer (Christian).
Collins says that the realms of science and theological belief are in separate realms and do not overlap:
"God gave us an opportunity through science to understand the natural world, but there will never be a scientific proof of God's existence." Quote from Francis Collins.
With regard to the video, I would agree, that "Young-earth-Creationism is embarrassing.
Jun 13, 2015 14:29:54 #
Jun 13, 2015 17:17:48 #
taffthetooth wrote:
It's also a non issue as far peoples Salvation is concerned.
it's about people learning how the world works circa 2015, not how they thought it worked circa 4000 BC.
...why would you bring a spiritual topic like salvation into a discussion about a pseudo-science?
Jun 14, 2015 10:39:29 #
green wrote:
it's about people learning how the world works circa 2015, not how they thought it worked circa 4000 BC.
...why would you bring a spiritual topic like salvation into a discussion about a pseudo-science?
...why would you bring a spiritual topic like salvation into a discussion about a pseudo-science?
Hi green, I meant it as a way of saying that the debate about YEC or OEC is
a moot point. If a person comes to believe in Jesus it doesn't matter which one he prefers.
Jun 14, 2015 12:38:50 #
As far as the age of the Earth, the Bible is not really a book of Geology, and does not clearly reveal that. Bishop Usher developed the idea of the Earths age, from using the generations in Genesis. As for millions of years of evolutionary life, no I dont believe that. As for the age of the Earth, there are many things that can confuse that issue, eye witness evidence is the only really reliable evidence we have concerning anything; that we do not have.
As far as Adam and Eve, I choose to believe the Bible on that one, and not believing the Bible; yes might seriously affect ones faith. Because what Jesus would you believe in ??. The God man, or the Monkey man. If you believe in the monkey man, sorry you are still lost in your sins.
You cannot have it both ways, those who want to mix evolution, and creation together are in total confusion, and a snare of the devil. As the old saying goes, you have to stand for something, or you will fall for anything.
As far as these people who want to mix the two, they are not Christian, regionalized maybe!, but not Christian. When you question the Bible, you question the very word your faith stands on. To say the Bible is unclear on some issues is Ok, it was not meant to be, and these things are not what the Bible is about in the first place.
Our Salvation rests on faith, not sight. To try to prove any of these things, means you do not have faith in the first place. You just have lots of questions!.
As far as Adam and Eve, I choose to believe the Bible on that one, and not believing the Bible; yes might seriously affect ones faith. Because what Jesus would you believe in ??. The God man, or the Monkey man. If you believe in the monkey man, sorry you are still lost in your sins.
You cannot have it both ways, those who want to mix evolution, and creation together are in total confusion, and a snare of the devil. As the old saying goes, you have to stand for something, or you will fall for anything.
As far as these people who want to mix the two, they are not Christian, regionalized maybe!, but not Christian. When you question the Bible, you question the very word your faith stands on. To say the Bible is unclear on some issues is Ok, it was not meant to be, and these things are not what the Bible is about in the first place.
Our Salvation rests on faith, not sight. To try to prove any of these things, means you do not have faith in the first place. You just have lots of questions!.
Jun 14, 2015 12:44:00 #
steve40 wrote:
As far as the age of the Earth, the Bible is not r... (show quote)
Much good in a lot of what you say here.
Jun 14, 2015 12:49:40 #
bvm
Loc: Glendale, Arizona
green wrote:
it's about people learning how the world works circa 2015, not how they thought it worked circa 4000 BC.
...why would you bring a spiritual topic like salvation into a discussion about a pseudo-science?
...why would you bring a spiritual topic like salvation into a discussion about a pseudo-science?
Oh you're saying it's like the democRATs, pseudo t***h?
Your desire for a dictatorship of the proletariat. has never worked and will never work.
When ever chaos is the rule of the day, order eventually takes over.
Jun 14, 2015 17:07:34 #
steve40 wrote:
As for the age of the Earth, there are many things that can confuse that issue, eye witness evidence is the only really reliable evidence we have concerning anything; that we do not have.
And yet...
Quote:
Our Salvation rests on faith, not sight. To try to prove any of these things, means you do not have faith in the first place. You just have lots of questions!.
Do you not see the contradiction?
Jun 14, 2015 17:11:04 #
OldDoc wrote:
Do you not see the contradiction?
What contradiction do you see?.
Jun 14, 2015 17:16:09 #
steve40 wrote:
What contradiction do you see?.
The first line you quoted, does not concern faith. It is concerning physical evidence. The second line is about faith, not physical evidence. :)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.