Posted on 05/16/2014 12:34:41 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Young earth creationist Ken Ham lashed out at televangelist Pat Robertson over his claim earlier this week that someone has to be “deaf, dumb and blind” to believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, accusing Robertson of compromising “the Word of God.”
“Pat Robertson illustrates one of the biggest problems we have today in the church — people like Robertson compromise the Word of God with the pagan ideas of fallible men!,” Ham wrote on his Facebook page. “Pat Robertson is not upholding the Word of God with his ridiculous statements — he is undermining the authority of the Word. And any attack on the WORD is an attack on the person of Jesus Christ, who IS THE WORD!”
Ham, who runs Answers in Genesis, a Christian ministry that takes the Bible’s Genesis account of creation literally, broke down the comments Robertson made on CBN’s “The 700 Club” earlier this week in a point-by-point analysis.
In addition to accusing Roberson of expressing “his utter ignorance of science,” Ham wrote that the televangelist “makes Christianity look silly.”
But Ham took particular exception to Robertson’s claim that there is no way that the Earth could have possibly come to fruition in such a short time span.
“Really Pat Robertson? You mean there is no way God, the infinite Creator, could not have created the universe in six days just six thousand years ago?,” Ham rhetorically asked. “God could have created everything in six seconds if He wanted [to]! And it’s not a matter of what you think anyway — it’s a matter of what God has clearly told us in His infallible WORD!”
As TheBlaze previously reported, Robertson unleashed his critiques on young earth creationists Tuesday, saying that they are mistaken in their views about the age of the planet.
“The truth is, you have to be deaf, dumb and blind to think that this Earth that we live in only has 6,000 years of existence, it just doesn’t, I’m sorry,” Robertson said.
He added, “I think what we’re looking at is that there was a point of time after the Earth was created, after these things were done, after the universe was formed, after the asteroid hit the Earth and wiped out the dinosaurs — after that, there was a point of time that there was a particular human being that God touched — and that was the human that started the race that we are now part of.”
Watch Robertson’s comments below:
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
It amazes me as well. Which is easier to do? Create the universe? Turn a few fish/loaves into food for all? Rise from the dead?
this is the faith component of Christianity.
Yes...it is a topic I have been recently researching.
Not to mention that the use of the word ‘day’ isn’t liimited to a 24 hour day, for example, “The Day of the Dinosaurs,” or “The Day of the Dead.”
“In Genesis 1 where day is preceded by an ordinal number it means a 24 hour day as we understand it.”
Really?
Perhaps you can provide a specific source or quote?
Answer: A careful examination of the Hebrew word for “day” and the context in which it appears in Genesis will lead to the conclusion that “day” means a literal, 24-hour period of time. The Hebrew word yom translated into the English “day” can mean more than one thing. It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my grandfather's day...”). It is used to refer to a 24-hour period in Genesis 7:11. It is used to refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk in Genesis 1:16. And it is used to refer to an unspecified period of time in Genesis 2:4. So, what does it mean in Genesis 1:5-2:2 when it's used in conjunction with ordinal numbers (i.e., the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day, the fifth day, the sixth day, and the seventh day)? Are these 24-hour periods or something else? Could yom as it is used here mean an unspecified period of time?
We can determine how yom should be interpreted in Genesis 1:5-2:2 simply by examining the context in which we find the word and then comparing its context with how we see its usage elsewhere in Scripture. By doing this we let Scripture interpret itself. The Hebrew word yom is used 2301 times in the Old Testament. Outside of Genesis 1, yom plus a number (used 410 times) always indicates an ordinary day, i.e., a 24-hour period. The words “evening” and “morning” together (38 times) always indicate an ordinary day. Yom + “evening” or “morning” (23 times) always indicates an ordinary day. Yom + “night” (52 times) always indicates an ordinary day.
The context in which the word yom is used in Genesis 1:5-2:2, describing each day as “the evening and the morning,” makes it quite clear that the author of Genesis meant 24-hour periods. The references to “evening” and “morning” make no sense unless they refer to a literal 24-hour day. This was the standard interpretation of the days of Genesis 1:5-2:2 until the 1800s when a paradigm shift occurred within the scientific community, and the earth's sedimentary strata layers were reinterpreted. Whereas previously the rock layers were interpreted as evidence of Noah's flood, the flood was thrown out by the scientific community and the rock layers were reinterpreted as evidence for an excessively old earth. Some well-meaning but terribly mistaken Christians then sought to reconcile this new anti-flood, anti-biblical interpretation with the Genesis account by reinterpreting yom to mean vast, unspecified periods of time.
The truth is that many of the old-earth interpretations are known to rely upon faulty assumptions. But we must not let the stubborn close-mindedness of some scientists influence how we read the Bible. According to Exodus 20:9-11, God used six literal days to create the world in order to serve as a model for man's workweek: work six days, rest one. Certainly God could have created everything in an instant if He wanted to. But apparently He had us in mind even before He made us (on the sixth day) and wanted to provide an example for us to follow.
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Genesis-days.html#ixzz31uhCk8QP
He added, “I think what we’re looking at is that there was a point of time after the Earth was created, after these things were done, after the universe was formed, after the asteroid hit the Earth and wiped out the dinosaurs — after that, there was a point of time that there was a particular human being that God touched — and that was the human that started the race that we are now part of.”
What chapter of the Bible is that story in Pat? I must have missed it.
That might make some kind of sense, if Ham had not been around as a public figure, doing the same thing he is doing today, for many years before he had a one-time debate with Nye.
This sure wasn't Noah's flood. This was the 1st earth age. Katabole.
So, every time the Bible says the word “day”, we have to read it as a thousand years?
Or are we maybe allowed to read things in context?
Just as I thought....bias “careful examinations” compounded by the belief that you’ve properly added the lineage in begats.....yawn...a tiresome argument that truly undermines our common belief in creationism.
In the beginning the earth was void and with out form which indicates it was already here
gen 2:4
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created,
Each day may have been a generation or a thousand generations, I sure don`t know.
But I believe the Bible tells us that Adam was here some where around six thousand years ago.
Yes I believe the people who believe that God created every thing in six literal days need to read the fine print.
Oh come on. In Genesis 1 when God (re)created the earth who was around to count the length of time a day was to the Lord? You either believe him that a day in his timezone is a thousand years or you don’t. Read in context rightly dividing the word of God.
In this case the word day.
Unless you have something else, then you are not allowing the Bible to interpret the Bible.
A simple question: was Jesus resurrected on the third day?
Man goes to God and asks, "What's a million years to you?"
God replies, "A second."
Then the man asks God, "What's a million dollars to you?"
God answers, "A penny."
Then the man asks God, "Can I have a penny?"
And God answers, "Sure, in a second."
Absolutely if you go to the Hebrew calendar and what a day was at the time.
You probably don’t believe that Jesus Christ transformed water into wine, or fed thousands with few loaves and fishes, all of which require time to produce.
Yep, this world just kinda happened; just took billions of years/ sarc.
How many generations are in a day?
It also says in the beginning the earth was void and with out form, meaning it was already here.
Adam was made about six thousand years ago but the earth may be millions of years old.
It has nothing to do with science, if any one takes the creation theory serious then they will have to ask their self, how many generations are in a day.
How do you know that source is legit?
How do you know the Hebrew calendar hasn't changed?
My point in asking these questions is that you are taking on faith that the Hebrew calendar is accurate and hasn't changed.
Yet, you are unwilling to accept on faith the Hebrew definition of the word day as used in the Old Testament as noted in the prior discussion because your faith in that source isn't as strong.
Uh oh!
an enemy who has been working to make men doubt God’s Word since the Garden?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.