[_ Old Earth _] creationism essential to christianity?

[felix]

I don't believe the Bible teaches there will be a different heavens and earth but rather a redeemed heavens and earth. But that is for a different topic.

(2Pet 3:10-12) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner [of persons] ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat

 

[Free]

(2Pet 3:10-12) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner [of persons] ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat

Like I said, this is for another topic.

 

[felix]

Like I said, this is for another topic.

No Free, It is not.

New heaven and a new earth does fall under "creationism" as God clearly did not and will not and neither does Scripture support any mechanism called evolution for God "creating" a new heaven and new earth. Since, God is going to destroy everything that is in the first heaven and first earth which scripture says it is going to melt and destroy, there is no place for any mechanism called evolution anywhere for the new heavens and new earth.

What makes you think "creationism" only includes first heaven and earth? It includes everything that is seen and invisible - believing by faith that God "created" everything through His Word, Jesus Christ.

Excluding the new heavens and new earth from creationism is unacceptable because, God Himself said He create a new heaven and new earth Isa 65:17.

Are you still believing in evolution nonsense, thinking that you are going to wait millions of years to get new heaven and earth evolved?

You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God (Matt 22:29).

 

[Free]

No Free, It is not.

Yes, it is.

New heaven and a new earth does fall under "creationism" as God clearly did not and will not and neither does Scripture support any mechanism called evolution for God "creating" a new heaven and new earth. Since, God is going to destroy everything that is in the first heaven and first earth which scripture says it is going to melt and destroy, there is no place for any mechanism called evolution anywhere for the new heavens and new earth.

What makes you think "creationism" only includes first heaven and earth? It includes everything that is seen and invisible - believing by faith that God "created" everything through His Word, Jesus Christ.

Excluding the new heavens and new earth from creationism is unacceptable because, God Himself said He create a new heaven and new earth Isa 65:17.

Are you still believing in evolution nonsense, thinking that you are going to wait millions of years to get new heaven and earth evolved?

This is not only off topic, it belongs in the End Times forum. The topic of this thread is "creationism essential to Christianity?" That question has been answered.

You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God (Matt 22:29).

Please refrain from making such accusations. Not only does it make you look proud and self-righteous, it does nothing to contribute positively to the discussion. See the quote by John Lennox in my signature.

 

[felix]

This is not only off topic, it belongs in the End Times forum. The topic of this thread is "creationism essential to Christianity?" That question has been answered.

No it has not been answered.

You try to set aside the question which I asked, conveniently exclude what God will create from 'creationism' to label it as off-topic.

Please refrain from making such accusations. Not only does it make you look proud and self-righteous, it does nothing to contribute positively to the discussion. See the quote by John Lennox in my signature.

I did not accuse you. Those are words spoken by Jesus Christ Himself when He was asked a question from a similar group of people who think God depends on things and mechanisms what humans depend and understand. I quoted Matt 22:29 to show God is powerful and does not require nor rely on any mechanism like 'evolution'.

 

[Free]

No it has not been answered.

Yes it has. Some answered 'no,' and some answered 'yes.'

I did not accuse you.

Yes you did. You quoted a passage in response to me which means you are applying it to me, suggesting that I do not "know the Scriptures nor the power of God."

Those are words spoken by Jesus Christ Himself when He was asked a question from a similar group of people who think God depends on things and mechanisms what humans depend and understand. I quoted Matt 22:29 to show God is powerful and does not require nor rely on any mechanism like 'evolution'.

That passage is entirely irrelevant. Jesus was responding to an argument from the Law. It doesn't matter if "God is powerful and does not require nor rely on any mechanism like 'evolution'," if God used a mechanism, he used a mechanism. A mechanism is in no way whatsoever any less powerful than any other method.

 

[felix]

It doesn't matter if "God is powerful and does not require nor rely on any mechanism like 'evolution'," if God used a mechanism, he used a mechanism. A mechanism is in no way whatsoever any less powerful than any other method.

But neither God nor Scriptures say God used any mechanism.

Eve was created after Adam. If God used a mechanism called evolution, was Adam waiting for millions of years until Eve got evolved from a piece of rib?

 

[Grazer]

But neither God nor Scriptures say God used any mechanism.

Eve was created after Adam. If God used a mechanism called evolution, was Adam waiting for millions of years until Eve got evolved from a piece of rib?

Well Eve wouldn't have been created out of Adams rib in the theory of evolution.

If you treat Genesis as scientific treatise/account of how the world and everything on it was created then she was which then begs the question; is Genesis meant to be treated in this manner? Or is it more like Proverbs/Psalms/Revelation in style? This essentially is what this discussion is about isn't it?

 

[felix]

Well Eve wouldn't have been created out of Adams rib in the theory of evolution.

If you treat Genesis as scientific treatise/account of how the world and everything on it was created then she was which then begs the question; is Genesis meant to be treated in this manner? Or is it more like Proverbs/Psalms/Revelation in style? This essentially is what this discussion is about isn't it?

(Gen 2:21-22) And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

Let me see how far a Christian would go denying Scripture in favor of evolution...

 

[Grazer]

(Gen 2:21-22) And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

Let me see how far a Christian would go denying Scripture in favor of evolution...

So you take the view that Genesis is a scientific treatise/account?

 

[cupid dave]

As I mentioned in other post, it is very clear on Scripture


when,

• a parable is used,
• an illustration is used,
• a example story is told
• a dream is interpreted
• a statement of spiritual meaning is referred,
• and spoken directly.

If you believe the old heavens and earth were created using a mechanism called evolution, do you believe the new heavens and new earth also requires the same mechanism of evolution?

Just as important as your listed considerations is the context within which certain ideas and even the vocabulary used might be modified.

For instance, in Gensis 1:1, the context and the choices of ssynonomyms for heaven recommend the meaning be understood to refer to the sky above.

1) The old heaven then is what we think of in regard to the sky above.


2) The New Heaven and the New Earth which is mentioned in the NT is different.
We can understand this because we read that a kingdom is coming, which is called the Kingdom of Heaven.
This does not immediately suggest the Sky, though many people will enhance the idea by assuming it is somewhere up in the sky, for sure.

Nevertheless, when Jesus says the Kingdom of God is within, we can realize that this idea of heaven, is the realm of our mind.
It is a much different "statement, a spiritual meaning to which it is referred."

The New Heaven, and the behavior of men here on Earth, motivated by their new thinking means a new paradigm will replace the whole of the Old World.

This has happened since Christ, the Old World has passed and by and large been forgotten to us.
A new heaven andnew earth has already come.
It is called Ancient History.





Zech. 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened, (the New Testament), to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

Zech. 13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, (380 AD, when Emperor Theodosius I enacted a law establishing Catholic Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire and ordering others to be called heretics), saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and (Paganism) shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets, (especially of Astrology), and the unclean spirit (of Libiùdinal sexual excesses) to pass out of the land.

 

[felix]

Just as important as your listed considerations is the context within which certain ideas and even the vocabulary used might be modified.

For instance, in Gensis 1:1, the context and the choices of ssynonomyms for heaven recommend the meaning be understood to refer to the sky above.

1) The old heaven then is what we think of in regard to the sky above.


2) The New Heaven and the New Earth which is mentioned in the NT is different.
We can understand this because we read that a kingdom is coming, which is called the Kingdom of Heaven.
This does not immediately suggest the Sky, though many people will enhance the idea by assuming it is somewhere up in the sky, for sure.

Nevertheless, when Jesus says the Kingdom of God is within, we can realize that this idea of heaven, is the realm of our mind.
It is a much different "statement, a spiritual meaning to which it is referred."

The New Heaven, and the behavior of men here on Earth, motivated by their new thinking means a new paradigm will replace the whole of the Old World.

This has happened since Christ, the Old World has passed and by and large been forgotten to us.
A new heaven andnew earth has already come.
It is called Ancient History.





Zech. 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened, (the New Testament), to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

Zech. 13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, (380 AD, when Emperor Theodosius I enacted a law establishing Catholic Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire and ordering others to be called heretics), saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and (Paganism) shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets, (especially of Astrology), and the unclean spirit (of Libiùdinal sexual excesses) to pass out of the land.

(2Pet 3:10) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

 

[felix]

So you take the view that Genesis is a scientific treatise/account?

God created scientific laws. He designed everything. I will NEVER try to explain the creation of "one creation" through "another creation". He created through His Word! As simple as that. Neither do I ask God for evidence nor do I expect them to be a repeatable process for me to declare them as scientific.

 

[cupid dave]

(2Pet 3:10) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

Yep...

That happened in 380 AD.

Christianity was mandated the only legal religion over all the Roman world.
For the Jews in Western Europe that was as if the whole world disappeared before their eyes.
They remained trspped thereafter in a sea of the enemies that they
had attacked so easily while Rome was pagan.





Rev.6:12 And I beheld, (in the days of Theodocius, who established the HolyRoman, Catholic, Apostolic Church), when he, (the Lamb of the tribe of Judah, theoff-spring of the root of David;[Rev 5:5]), had opened the sixth seal (of scripture), and, lo, there was a great (sociological)earthquaqe (of institutionalized religious change); and the Sun(Signs of Astrology) became (as) black as (the) sackclothof (a nun's) hair, and the moon became as blood (of Christ, todetermine the very day of the Christian Passover).



Rev.6:13 And the stars' (i.e.; the twelve constellations of Sun Signs) ofheaven fell (from popular grace)unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, (ruined), when she is (destructively)shaken of a mighty wind.



Rev.6:14 And (Astrology) departed (from popular practice) as ascroll when it is rolled together; and every (Pagan religion and secretsociety) were moved out of their places.



Rev.6:15 And (1) the kings of the earth, (POLITICIANS), and (2) the greatmen, (STATESMEN), and (3) the rich men, (ECONOMIC BARONS), and (4) thechief captains, (PRIESTHOODS),and (5) the mighty men, (MILITARY LEADERS), and (6) every bondman, (CRAFTSMAN), and (7) every freeman, (PEASANT), hid themselvesin the dens and in the rocks (of the pagan temples);



Rev.6:16 And said to the mountains (of the previous social institutions)and rocks (of cultural norms), Fall on us, (help!), and hide us from the face (ofPapal judgment) of UniversalCatholicism), him that sitteth on the throne (Theodocius, who establishedChristian Rome) and from the (words of) wrath of the lamb,(the Word of the New Testament):



Rev.6:17 For the great day of his wrath, (the one thousand year reign predicted), is come; and who, (what other God or religion), shall beable to stand (during these Dark Ages)?



Note,Catholic Encyclopedia:

Withthe overthrow of the old Roman Empire and the victory of

Christianity,astrology lost its importance in the centers of Christian civilization in theWest. The last known astrologer of the old world was Johannes Laurentius (sometimescalled Lydus) of Philadelphia in Lydia, who lived A.D. 490-565.

 

[Barbarian]

Johannes Kepler, who discovered the laws governing motions of planets in the 17th century, did horoscopes for people, and argued that they were useful and accurate.

 

[felix]

Yep...

That happened in 380 AD.

Christianity was mandated the only legal religion over all the Roman world.
For the Jews in Western Europe that was as if the whole world disappeared before their eyes.
They remained trspped thereafter in a sea of the enemies that they
had attacked so easily while Rome was pagan.

So what happened to the Jews who came and were living in India after both the scattering?

What happened to the non-European continents, esp. the sub continent and the Christians living there? Did you forgot that Christianity in India is as old as Christianity itself as the disciple of Jesus, Thomas the Apostle came to India, preached to the Jews and Christians in India and planted a Church with believers referred as 'Saint Thomas Christians'?

So, next time when you refer the earth or world, don't forgot that the world or earth is not just Europe alone.

 

[spartakis]

(Gen 2:21-22) And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

Let me see how far a Christian would go denying Scripture in favor of evolution...

This will probably be my only post here but,
Not only will they deny Genesis they will deny a commandment God wrote.

Exodus 20:8-11
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The time of creation obviously means a lot and should be taken as literal days.

They will deny the Words of Jesus

Mark 10:6
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Matt 19:4
And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

It is important to believe the words of Moses

John 5:46-47
For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

I could go on and on, but I wonder the same thing felix.

 

[Grazer]

We need to be careful with use of words here. To take something literally means to take it as it would have been taken/interpreted at the time. Literalistic means to take it at face value.

The issue of evolution and Genesis is a relatively new issue. How to interpret the days in Genesis is not. St Augustine in 5th Century AD wrote;

But simultaneously with time the world was made, if in the world's creation change and motion were created, as seems evident from the order of the first six or seven days. For in these days the morning and evening are counted, until, on the sixth day, all things which God then made were finished, and on the seventh the rest of God was mysteriously and sublimely signalized. What kind of days these were it is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible for us to conceive, and how much more to say

He wrote a great deal about Genesis in his book The Literal Interpretation of Genesis

Many Christians throughout history have wrestled with this issue, not based on science but on what the text actually says. Celsus wrote:

For who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? And that the first day was, as it were, also without a sky? And who is so foolish as to suppose that God, after the manner of a husbandman, planted a paradise in Eden, towards the east, and placed in it a tree of life, visible and palpable, so that one tasting of the fruit by the bodily teeth obtained life? And again, that one was a partaker of good and evil by masticating what was taken from the tree? And if God is said to walk in the paradise in the evening, and Adam to hide himself under a tree, I do not suppose that anyone doubts that these things figuratively indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place in appearance, and not literally

I'm always reminded of the Galileo saga and his insistence that Copernicus was right. To say the church disagreed was an understatement. Cardinal Bellarmine went as far to say

The doctrine attributed to Copernicus that the earth moves around the sun.....is contrary to the Holy Scriptures and therefore cannot be defended or held

They cited passages such as the below:

The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and armed with strength; indeed, the world is established, firm and secure - Psalm 93:1
Say among the nations, “The LORD reigns.†The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity - Psalm 96:10
Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved - 1 Chronicles 16:30
He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved - Psalm 104:5
The sun rises and the sun sets and hurries back to where it rises - Ecclesiastes 1:5

But history and science has long since shown that Copernicus and Galileo were right and we no longer interpret those passages in the manner the church did back then. But no one would accuse me or anyone of denying scripture by saying the earth moves. I think historical context is vitally important when looking at this issue and I've found Peter Enns book Inspiration and Incarnation very useful as well as http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/religion/faith/index.html. The fact Exodus references the days in Genesis is no surprise but it doesn't say anything about how that story would have been interpreted and by extension how the days were.

I do read and listen to a lot of theologians and scholars on this subject because I know my limited understanding is no where near enough to make full sense of the issue and do scripture the full justice it deserves. But how I interpret Genesis has no bearing on my salvation in and relationship with Christ.

 

[hadron]

Grazer, I'm going to pick up that book. Looks very interesting. Thanks for sharing such a thought provoking and helpful post here.

 

[Free]

We need to be careful with use of words here. To take something literally means to take it as it would have been taken/interpreted at the time. Literalistic means to take it at face value.

......

I'm always reminded of the Galileo saga and his insistence that Copernicus was right. To say the church disagreed was an understatement. Cardinal Bellarmine went as far to say

The doctrine attributed to Copernicus that the earth moves around the sun.....is contrary to the Holy Scriptures and therefore cannot be defended or held

They cited passages such as the below:

The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and armed with strength; indeed, the world is established, firm and secure - Psalm 93:1
Say among the nations, “The LORD reigns.” The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity - Psalm 96:10
Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved - 1 Chronicles 16:30
He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved - Psalm 104:5
The sun rises and the sun sets and hurries back to where it rises - Ecclesiastes 1:5

But history and science has long since shown that Copernicus and Galileo were right and we no longer interpret those passages in the manner the church did back then. But no one would accuse me or anyone of denying scripture by saying the earth moves. I think historical context is vitally important when looking at this issue and I've found Peter Enns book Inspiration and Incarnation very useful as well as http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/religion/faith/index.html. The fact Exodus references the days in Genesis is no surprise but it doesn't say anything about how that story would have been interpreted and by extension how the days were.

I have used the geocentric analogy before but it is worth saying that it was not only the Church that was against Copernicus and Galileo. As you probably know, it was actually the reigning scientific paradigm of the day and at least some of the Church's insistence on it's interpretation of Scripture had to do with appeasing everyone, not just those within the Church. Iirc, Aristotle was the first to propose the geocentric model.