Posted on 05/29/2006 6:28:25 AM PDT by truthfinder9
Amen.
It's the gaiters, the suspenders and the Italian shoes.
The Washington flood was localized.
Are there any "old-earthers" (as opposed to young-earth literal creationists) who also hold to a literal Adam & Eve, created ex nihilo?
I had trouble finding an article on the "Research & Reason" website that openly addresses this one way or another. The closest thing I found - the link "Who was Adam?" on the homepage - leads to this book on Amazon.com, which appears to suggest a long period of theistic evolution leading up to the sixth day, after which Adam and Eve, distinct individuals representing a new species (not derived from earlier hominids), suddenly appear - created by miraculous intervention and delivered into a literal Garden of Eden approx. 70,000 years ago.
Do I understand this correctly, as the position that "Research & Reason" is taking?
"Are there any "old-earthers" (as opposed to young-earth literal creationists) who also hold to a literal Adam & Eve, created ex nihilo?"
Virtually all old-earther literal creationists hold to a literal Adam & Eve, created ex nihilo. Those who don't are technically not OECs, but probably thiestic evolutionists.
"Who was Adam?" recounts the scientific evidence against evolution, arguing for the special creation (from scientific evidence) of all hominids and humans. I'm not sure where you found "theistic evolution" in that.
Much of the confusion comes from YECs who like to equate OECs with thiestic evolutionists. There are some major, obvious differences between them.
I was confused on that exact point myself, and it appeared others might have been as well. I greatly appreciate your answer and clarification.
HUGE does not equal worldwide.
There are broad areas of the American West that show no signs of flooding in the strata dated at the time the Great Flood was to occur.
God cannot be proven.
The proof is in what God chooses to reveal. Indeed God has revealed himself to mankind,
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: (Romans 1:20 KJV)
but mankind refuses to look at the evidence.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (Romans 1:21 KJV)
What evidence are you referring to?
The man who wrote these words claims to have been revealed to the Reality of the Eternal God. That's all the evidence he would need.
I had the same type of revelation, though not near as elaborate as Paul's "road to Damascus" account.
But I wouldn't have just taken his word for it if I hadn't seen it myself.
Just look around. The evidence is there for all but fools to see.
I don't see how an imperfect, ephemeral world is proof of a perfect eternal God. But that's just me.
You can't prove God created the world nor can it be disproven.
No, keep guessing.
"that you accused of attacking other Christians"
It wasn't an accusation, it was based on fact:
"accusing them of turning people away from the bible "
Again, not an accusation, but a verifiable fact. Check out virtually any skeptic book on creation or God and there's usually a section on YECism see how the skeptics use it as a reason not to believe in the Bible or God.
"accusing them of being cults"
No, I implied they were acting like cults. "but it is a position which holds scripture above science and not on an equal footing."
All YECs claim this only to claim on the same page the infallibility of their creation science. You can't have it both ways.
Are you an old earth creationist?
How is that different than a theistic evolutionist?
Serious question: I honestly don't know.
OEC's believe that Darwinian evolution did NOT occur, that the evidence for antiquity of the universe is overwhelming, old age is not equivelent to evolution (that's a myth created by evolutionists who appeal to time to solve their problems and by young-earthers who have bought into the evolutionist's claim that antiquity is a evolution "proof"), the literal Adam, the special creation of man and animal life, that a literal and consistent interpretation of the Bible requires OECism. Etc.
Thiestic evolutionists (TE) believe God created the universe and let it go and allowed evolution to take control. Some TEs believe God occasionally interacted with the universe after letting it go, some do not. Some TEs believe there are signs of design in the universe (like OECs & YECs do), others do not.
There are actually a variety of creation views that don't support evolution (however, some YEC theories on animal speciation after the ark actually require some very fast evolutionary processes!), here are the four main ones:
Four Views of the Biblical Creation Account
These articles compare YECism and OECism:
Ten Major Similarities Between Calendar-Day and Day-Age Creationists
Ten Major Differences Between Calendar-Day and Day-Age Creationists
It's really like any other Christian topic, there are various theories considered acceptable by orthodox Christianity, but most people are familar with what they grew up with.
....
The Jewish Calendar's missing 240 years
This article may provide some insights as the current year from creation.
b'shem y'shua
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.