Donations for the month of July


We have received a total of $0 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
NH, USA
Posts: 13,469
Joined: April 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,650
Posts51,277
Members928
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,469
Tom 3,480
chestnutmare 2,916
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,762
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 37
Tom 32
John_C 5
Johan 1
Recent Posts
Learning Presuppositional Apologetics
by ReformedDisciple. Wed Jul 18, 2018 5:05 PM
Apologetics
by ReformedDisciple. Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:44 PM
Starting Out
by ReformedDisciple. Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:25 PM
The PCA's Slide Into the Homosexual Abyss Accelerates
by ReformedDisciple. Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:50 PM
Conspiracy?
by ReformedDisciple. Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:32 AM
AN EARNEST PLEA TO SUPPORT THE HIGHWAY
by Movinforward86. Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:40 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54689
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:32 AM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:32 AM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 235
NJ/PA
Anthony C. Offline
Enthusiast
Anthony C.  Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 235
NJ/PA
Originally Posted by Tom
Anthony, I hear you and agree. I think it is only fair to say that not all Christians who believe in an Old Earth believe in evolution; many of them believe in a literal Adam and Eve. I believe they are sincerely wrong, but....
I will also state that years ago I bought into an Old Earth as a fairly young believer out of ignorance. Mainly because a scientist from NASA came to our Church and preached on Genesis. He did not say anything definite, but he seemed to believe that the six days of creation were compatible with 'big bangs". I thought God could very well have used big bangs to create. Back then, I was not mature enough to understand some of the ramifications of this view. Similarly to how at that time I was a Dispensationalist simply because that was the only view I heard about.

Tom

You may be mistaken..... I think many old earthers are TE.....so if they believe in literal Adam & Eve, they don't believe they were necessarily the first humans or non-products of natural (inconceivable bash) molecules-to-man evolution.... Not sure why (or how) they would believe in old earth, big bang AND creation.....????

I just believe in Creation and the global flood....not their stupid dating methods that presuppose too much

Last edited by Anthony C.; Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:38 AM.
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54690
Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:29 AM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:29 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Anthony, I did not say that there are not Older Earthers that also believed in evolution. I said that many Old Earthers believe in a literal Adam and Eve. The pastor that I had back then certainly believed in a literal Adam and Eve and I did as well. What I am saying is, I (and I believe is the case with my old pastor) I was not consistent in my hermeneutics. Even today, I still run into Reformed Christians who are otherwise orthodox, believe in either the 'Framework view" or the Old Earth view. In fact, some of them have been members of The-Highway years ago. As for the big bang, although I at one time believed in it; the more I studied the issue, the more I thought it was kind of silly. For one thing, with each big bang, would not it destroy what was created during the last big bang? Funny how a NASA scientist can make things seem correct to many.
Tom

Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54691
Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:22 AM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:22 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Originally Posted by Tom
I think it is only fair to say that not all Christians who believe in an Old Earth believe in evolution; many of them believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

Could you please explain how someone can believe in an "Old Earth" theory but not evolution? Do they believe that God created everything up until Adam and Eve over a period of millions or billions or trillions of years, if true, what exactly was God doing during that time period, i.e., what kind of creation would that be? And, thus after all that time when the universe and the earth finally was made as God intended it to be, He created Adam and Eve as mature adults... would that be what these "Old Earth but no evolution" alleged Christians believe? If not, again, please explain what appears to me to be an untenable/antithetical view. scratchchin

I'm assuming that you can give a brief explanation of this view since you stated you once embraced it. grin


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54692
Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:14 PM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:14 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Pilgrim
Surely after all these years you know there are many who believe in an Old Earth, yet do not believe in evolution.
In my case, I believed that because I was taught that and did not understand the ramifications of it.
Similarly to the reason why I at one time was a Dispensationalist, because that is the only position I was taught at the time.
How can someone rationalize an Old Earth without believing in evolution?
I actually don't know, because when I started rationalizing the issue; I came to believe in a YE.
I believe if you search the archives you will find a few discussions of people who believe in an Old earth but not evolution.

Tom

Last edited by Tom; Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:21 PM.
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54693
Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:44 PM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:44 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
All I asked, since you used to hold to an Old Earth but not any form of evolutionary theory, is to give me a brief explanation of the basics of such a view. I'm sure there are lots of others here who would really like to read an answer to that question as well. Thanks! grin


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54694
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:05 PM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:05 PM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 235
NJ/PA
Anthony C. Offline
Enthusiast
Anthony C.  Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 235
NJ/PA
Tom, let me help you.... This guy fits the profile.....
Hugh Ross is known for establishing his own ministry in 1986, called Reasons to Believe that promotes progressive and day-age forms of old Earth creationism. Ross accepts the scientific age of the earth and the scientific age of the universe, however he rejects unguided evolution and abiogenesis as explanations for the history and origin of life

Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Pilgrim] #54695
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:21 PM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:21 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Sorry Pilgrim
In my case, I can't remember anything that would help you understand their position.
Tom

Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54696
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:28 PM
Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:28 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Thanks, that may very well be how a lot of Old Earth advocates view things.
Unfortunate (or perhaps fortunately?) my views were not formed enough back then to give a defence of that view.
Like I said, when I actually started to look into the matter deeper; fairly quickly I embraced the YE view.
At least that is my recollection.

Tom

Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54699
Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:17 AM
Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:17 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
I found the information from the person who talked about Paul being mistaken that I mentioned in my opening post.
Unfortunately, I was mistaken concerning one thing. It had to do with a literal Adam and Eve. Dr. Peter Enns, stated that Paul believed in a literal Adam and Eve; but Paul was mistaken in that belief. It was not about Paul believing in a young earth. You can read more at: https://peteenns.com/did-the-apostle-paul-or-god-believe-in-a-literal-adam/
I understand that not too long ago Dr. Peter Enns was involved in a controversy when he was a Professor at Westminster Theological Seminary and was suspended. The problem seemed to be centered around the inspiration and the inerrancy of Scripture. Enns claims to believe in both the inspiration and the inerrancy of Scripture. Yet he does not believe in the traditional view of the doctrines. Instead he says there are errors in Scripture; yet they we put there by God Himself. He does not believe it is necessary to reconcile the errors in Scripture, because God placed them there by design. Enns

Thinking about this; I think it explains why he could make such an outlandish statement such as Paul was mistaken about Adam and Eve being literal historic people. He seems to believe that this does not in any way destroy either the inspiration, or the inerrancy of Scripture. He believes that the traditional understanding of inspiration and inerrancy displays bias that Scripture does not teach.
Apparently there was debated between GK Beale and Peter Enns.
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/49/49-2/JETS_49-2_287-312_Beale.pdf

Apparently Enns responded to this and Beale surrejoindered Enns. (Just in case this interests anyone)
I have chosen to include some relevant things written by Beale.
Quote
Once he moves into his review of Enns' book Beale finds many a fault and points them out in painstaking detail. The 8 major points are:
1. Enns finds myth in the narratives in Genesis (creation; flood) that doesn't correspond to actual historical events. 2. Enns assumes the biblical writers were not objective in narrating history and recorded events in ways that lack correspondence to modern writers would record them. 3. Enns never details his understanding of Jesus' incarnation which is his model analogy for his understanding of Scripture. 4. Enns objects to using modern definitions of truth and error to evaluate Scripture without defining ancient understandings of truth and error. 5. Enns doesn't take his own advice to evaluate others' ideas with humility, love, and patience. 6. Enns' book is ambiguous at important junctures of his discussion. 7. Enns doesn't present and discuss viewpoints other than his own. 8. Enns caricatures evangelical scholarship by presenting fundamentalist arguments and making no distinction
.
From: https://rdtwot.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/book-review_beale2.pdf This is a review of Beale's book 'The Erosion Inerrancy Evangelicalism.'
By the way, the link above concerning these points that Beale makes concerning Enns; the links author says Beale seriously misreads Enns
Tom



Last edited by Tom; Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:55 AM.
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54700
Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:40 AM
Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:40 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Heretics like Peter Enns are in many ways similar to the modern "Main Street Media", those infamous purveyors of Fake News......no, VERY Fake News. They both are looking for that "something new" which would bring them notoriety, first and foremost (cf. Acts 17:21) and then to discredit someone else. The way they do this is to fabricate whatever it is they want to be "new", which is typically false, i.e., it is antithetical to facts, illogical, or even irrational. Enns uses the same old trick of redefining terms which are meant to give credibility to his musings which are nothing less than a denial of established facts and truth... in this case, the doctrine of the divine inspiration, innerancy and infallibility of Scripture. Doing so is a deliberate plan for his modus operandi which opens the door for him to believe whatever he wants to believe which otherwise would be a direct contradiction to what God has written and preserved for all mankind and by which He shall judge the quick and the dead. Peter Enns isn't worth the time to mention his name and it is my advice that most people should avoid him and his writings and ideas at all cost. I suppose those in the academia have some obligation to criticize such heretics and expose them for who they are. Yet, I wonder just how much positive effect their efforts have. And in Peter Enns case, is he even worth dealing with. I mean, when someone comes along and suggests that Paul was mistaken, or that Adam and Eve weren't real historical individuals, etc., etc., ad nauseam do such people even deserve other's time to show him to be wrong and think he is some kind of scholar who should at least be given a hearing? igiveup


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54701
Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:38 PM
Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:38 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,481
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Pilgrim, you do have a great point about whether or not heretics like Enns is even worth dealing with. Unfortunately, he has had influence on a lot of people. I certainly wouldn't want to become guilty of making people aware of him; so they would think there is merit in what he is saying.

Tom

Re: Paul on a Young Earth [Re: Tom] #54702
Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:23 PM
Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,469
NH, USA
Matthew 15:12-14 (ASV) "Then came the disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, when they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if the blind guide the blind, both shall fall into a pit."

1 Corinthians 11:19 (KJV) "For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."

2 Peter 2:1-3 (ASV) "But there arose false prophets also among the people, as among you also there shall be false teachers, who shall privily bring in destructive heresies, denying even the Master that bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their lascivious doings; by reason of whom the way of the truth shall be evil spoken of. And in covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose sentence now from of old lingereth not, and their destruction slumbereth not."


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Who's Online Now
1 registered members (ReformedDisciple), 23 guests, and 96 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Movinforward86, Micki Bowman, Nigel J, wischnotes, Dutch Michael
928 Registered Users
Shout Box
July
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
778,938 Gospel truth
Page Time: 0.064s Queries: 16 (0.004s) Memory: 2.9586 MB (Peak: 3.2704 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-07-18 22:10:51 UTC