Posted on 09/12/2010 4:43:31 PM PDT by truthfinder9
Ken Ham and his "Answers in Genesis" have been long criticized for their attacks on Christians who don't agree with his Genesis interpretation, his misrepresentation of what those people believe and Ham/AiG's complete lack of anything resembling biblical scholarship. So now they attack the Assemblies of God churches (http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/09/08/a-sad-day-for-the-assemblies-of-god-denomination/) for not latching on to the uncritical AiG beliefs. Hopefully, the AoG are simply trying to work through the issues at a scholarly level (something AiG cannot seem to do) and won't follow the current trend of some Christians in accepting theistic evolution. It is the fault of people like Ken Ham for this trend because he and his people have been shouting for years that there are only two views and if you don't agree with him you are a compromiser. They also routinely misrepresent all views other than their own. If you disagree with AiG, you must be compromising or confused or led astray.
>> This section of Jeremiah is part of a larger discourse of predictive prophecy ... its a look into the future not the past. The time of the prophecy was just before the Babylonian captivity and Jeremiah is describing what WILL take place in the future!<<
I realize that is talking about Nebuchadnezzar taking the Jews captive and starting the Babylonian empire.
But in v 23 God is speaking about what had been done to a previous rebellious people.
23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
That scenario didn’t happen when Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem. The earth was not “without form and void”. Neither was there “no light” That was a direct reference to the world as it was in Gen 1:2. Verse 23-27 cannot be attributed to the time of the capturing of Israel.
So historically verse 23 especially would not fit anything that happened when Israel went into captivity in Babylon. Desolate perhaps, but not “without form and void”.
I have to keep this short as I have commitments but will address the inhabitants of the pre Adamic world later.
Creationists can’t really explain the dinosaurs and other facts
Dinosaurs are quite simple to explain from a Creationist standpoint. In fact, they are explained quite well to most folks' satisfaction by the ministry of AnswersInGenesis.
I, for one, have seen the footprints of dinosaurs alongside those of man down at Glenn Rose Tx.
There is a gap between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2 of billions of years.
Let me guess, the entire basis of accepting a "gap" theory is a redefined 1611 English word "replenish" found only in the KJV (Ge 1:28) (but curiously not in the original language, nor the Latin Vulgate, nor the LXX nor the 1599 Geneva, nor any other subsequent translation).
Personally, I don't see what you gain by a "gap" guess ( a theory requires at least some testable criteria, GT is purely speculation based on absolutely nothing except a deliberate misunderstanding of the KJV word) since the six literal days (confirmed by God and etched into the Ten Commandments) includes forming the sun, planets and stars - something not existing during the "gap". The planet would get fairly cold without the trillions of ginormous fusion reactors out there. Also, "gap" has to explain away the Global Flood, which is not advisable since Jesus Christ refered to it Himself. If this is only about dating rocks, I recommend reading Creationist materials on the many forms of radiometric dating - a practice that is about as valid a science as water-witching.
Also, you got to explain how death preceded sin, something that God said came as a result of Adam's Fall. Billions of years of alleged death by tooth and claw don't make an assessment of "very good". It also shows that God does pointless and failed things. Also bad attributes to make when describing God. There are reasons why God put critters on earth - it was for man to take dominion over. Man was formed to demonstrate God's glory, part of making man in God's image was to give him authority of God's Creation which supralapsarians would indicate is the foundation for playing out the doctrine of Redemption in that Paradise is restored. (but that is another topic) A "gap" guess needlessly makes a mockery of that doctrine. Also, there is no explanation for how inorganic material somehow transmogrified into organic material. Even Evolution can't go there and Evolutionists will quickly point out that Evolution doesn't attempt to explain how life came from non-life. As a simple thought experiment, go squash a bug and then tell me how it can come back to life - you have a head start in that all of the needed materials, in the right quantities are right there. You even have the impossible to randomly assemble proteins already combined and good to go.
The popular explanation is a fancyful campfire story that claims that Lucifer sinned "billions of years ago" and that somehow this merited using pre-creation Earth as a place to stash a spirit being and his minions, then this Spirit Being and his minions were somehow capable of wrecking so much environmental damage that the whole planet became literally "formless and void" requiring an extreme makeover. I guess they needed something a bit more polluting that SUVs and styrofoam burger boxes. This makes Mormon eschatology and the infinite regression afterlife sound reasonable in comparison.
I wish you well in this baseless faith, you won't make friends with either Evolutionists or Creationists, just a target of scorn and ridicule.
>>I, for one, have seen the footprints of dinosaurs alongside those of man down at Glenn Rose Tx.<<
I’m not sure you’re reading what I mean. Of course there were dinosaurs. Not since Gen 1:2 however.
The rest of your post makes little or no sense. The gap theory does nothing to change the creation of the world as we understand it since Gen 1:2. Not one truth of scripture is changed denied or added to in any way.
How can you put God into a box that consists of only the last 6-7,000 years since Adam? You have to assume that He did nothing for the time prior.
Oh, and much of my research was done in the original Greek, and Hebrew. Jesus spoke Aramaic but Greek and Hebrew were the written word used in the original writings that were translated into Latin.
I would suggest you take God out of the box and let Him speak to you.
How can you put God into a box that consists of only the last 6-7,000 years since Adam? You have to assume that He did nothing for the time prior.
If anyone was putting "God in a box" I think it is God who moves according to the counsel of His Will and Pleasure.
I love campfire stories, and I love speculative theology, but the various "Gap" fables don't do anything except compromise and syncretize the Word with the misotheistic rantings of atheists, that is what keeps "Gap" from being acceptable in any context. From my previous post, I alluded to one of the reasons that "Gap" exists, and that is to somehow pacify the gullible who are led to believe that the discredited Uniformitarian presuppositions are somehow valid.
From what I know of "Gap", it exists for two reasons:
The Great Flood makes the latter unnecessary as scientifically reproducible, and empirically demonstrated (Mt St Helens) liquifaction does a splendid job of giving us rock layers in minutes and hours rather than eons.
As for the former, the "Gap"ers need to explain why Lucifer needed to have a planet. Its an answer in search of a question. There is no redemption for Lucifer and his minions, and no rational excuse for why we have a whole age of existence that is allegedly alluded to in Peter's epistle but apparently unknown to Jewish and contemporary writers before and after until the 19th century.
Oh, and much of my research was done in the original Greek, and Hebrew
Good to know that. Then you should have noticed the second verse of the Bible is disjunctive describing the result of the creation, not that of any unspecified judgment. Furthermore that the Hebrew word "haythah" needs a "to" preposition preceding it before that word can mean "became", otherwise you are repeating the error of Simon Episcopius (who was one of the Remonstrants smacked down at Dort) who can be traced as being the first to pervert the passage to be rendered "became void and waste". But you are a Hebrew language scholar, so I'm sure this is just a simple review. [For the record, its really not a good plan to put much stock in theories developed by a guy who was proven to be a heretic]
I think it is a bit creepy if not downright blasphemous to imagine the Garden of Eden, described as being "very good" built literally atop a landfill of "billions of years" of bones stacked deep as grim reminder of eons of death, blood, violence and judgment (that Scripture vehemently claims did not exist prior to Adam's fall). But if you sleep better on that bed of compromises, more power to you.
Hey, if you want to believe that a perfect God created something “without form and void” who am I to try to change your mind? The first thing a perfect God did was a total mess?
I have never said that the interpretation of verse two includes the word became.
we-ha-arets haythah thohu wa-bhohu
Now the earth was formless and empty
Rules of linguistics, of grammar and syntax, and the context need to be consistent.
We could discuss this ad nauseum but it would really serve no purpose.
Whether you believe in the gap theory or not does not change the truth about the free gift of Salvation. Much has been done to try to add to the simple truth that we are told in Scripture. The only thing needed for Salvation is a heartfelt belief that Jesus paid the price completely and is our only hope.
“believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved-and your house”
The confusion is over what the word “evolution” means.
The anti-theists use the “evidence” of evolution that we see today, variation and adaptation,
to “prove” “evolution” of molecules to man.
The two are really not related in the least. One assumes all information is available at creation (via a MIND), the other assumes addition of information through blind processes.
Variation and adaptation, from a Creationist point of view, is the INHERENT, CREATED ability of the created kinds to change and adapt WITHIN THEIR KIND.
The molecules to man “evolution” definition says that information is added over time, not present at the beginning.
Dear Mr Ham
Just in case you did not read the whole article here is the official Assembly of God position:
While some think that the account of human creation is merely parabolic and not to be taken literally, Genesis pointedly declares God formed Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life (2:7). Subsequently, God deliberately made Eve from Adam’s rib [perhaps “side”] (2:22). Both Adam and Eve, male and female, are declared to be made in the “image” and “likeness” of God. These carefully delineated creative acts indicate that humans are distinct from animals. God did not form Adam from some previously existing creature (1 Corinthians 15:39). While some think that the account of human creation is merely parabolic and not to be taken literally, Genesis pointedly declares God formed Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life (2:7). Subsequently, God deliberately made Eve from Adam’s rib [perhaps “side”] (2:22). Both Adam and Eve, male and female, are declared to be made in the “image” and “likeness” of God. These carefully delineated creative acts indicate that humans are distinct from animals. God did not form Adam from some previously existing creature (1 Corinthians 15:39). While some think that the account of human creation is merely parabolic and not to be taken literally, Genesis pointedly declares God formed Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life (2:7). Subsequently, God deliberately made Eve from Adam’s rib [perhaps “side”] (2:22). Both Adam and Eve, male and female, are declared to be made in the “image” and “likeness” of God. These carefully delineated creative acts indicate that humans are distinct from animals. God did not form Adam from some previously existing creature (1 Corinthians 15:39). Any evolutionary theory, including theistic evolution/evolutionary creationism, that claims all forms of life arose from a common ancestry is thereby ruled out.
It’s the Independent Baptist Position/And the KJV “Position’ as well.
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.