Debate evolves into religious discussion

Arkanjel

New Member
Have you fellow CGA'ers been paying attention to those who want to be president?

Debate evolves into religious discussion

I read through this article and was astounded by it. Basically none of the "conservative" types will own up to believing in a "literal" 6-day creation. Ill pull some quotes from the article.

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth," said Huckabee, an ordained Baptist minister. "A person either believes that God created the process or believes that it was an accident and that it just happened all on its own."

However, when pressed about whether he believed in a literal interpretation of the timeline laid out in Genesis -- that God created the world in six days about 6,000 years ago -- Huckabee said, "I don't know."

So here we have an ordained Baptist minister who himself does not believe in God's word! What is that about? He is basically saying that God helped the process along. What I get from that is he believes in the scince of man, but with a little of God thrown in for good measure. Apparently he must not think God is big enough to be able to make creation in 6 days.
"Whether God did it in six days or whether he did it in six days that represented periods of time, he did it. And that's what's important."

No sir, I'm afraid what is important is whether or not you have faith in what God says He did.

But it gets better folks...
Huckabee's elucidation of his views during Tuesday's debate drew a follow-up response from Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who, when the topic came up in the first debate, had said he believed in evolution.

"I admire [Huckabee's] description, because I hold that view," said McCain, an Episcopalian. "There's no doubt in my mind that the hand of God was in what we are today. And I do believe that we are unique, and believe that God loves us."


So here John McCain is indeed acknowledging the fact that they both believe in a form of evolution. He follows that up with telling us how much God must love us. Well I agree, God does love us, but enough to make us a special creation separate from the animals, and in only 6 days, not millions of year period days.

"One of the problems we have with our society today is that we've put faith and science at odds with each other. They aren't at odds with each other. If they are, check your faith, or check your science."
Senator Brownback is right about this. There is plenty of science out there to back up a literal 6 day creation view. Its not hard to find, Answers in Genesis, Dr. Carl Baugh, Ken Hamm, The new creation museum that just opened up.
And Huckabee made it clear that he did not appreciate the question, either, calling it unfair.
How is this an unfair question? Are you ashamed of your faith?

Indeed when reading this kind of mumbo-jumbo its not hard to see why the church is becoming basically ecumenical and is being watered down so as to be accepted by everyone so we don't offend anyone. If you call yourself a Christian and are offended by any part of God's word, you might want to check your facts or check your faith because somewhere you have a problem with God's sovereignty and authority.
 
Last edited:
And what's truly scary about this... is that Huckabee is influencing the minds of people at his church. If the minister doesn't believe the Bible is God's word, why is he there?

*sigh*

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, (2 Timothy 3:14-16)

What part of this don't people understand? God-Breathed. God made sure that the gospels said exactly what He wanted them to say. God said that he created everything in six days. God said He has a plan for each of us. God says that He sent His Son to take away the sins of the world.

If you don't believe part of it, then you don't honestly believe any of it. It just doesn't make sense that one can say "I believe that Jesus took my place," but then follow it up with "but I don't believe that God could have done...."

It's an all-or-none deal. Take it, or leave it.

I, for one, am looking forward to getting to see the Creation Museum. It's only a few hours away from where I live. I think I'll try to get down there this summer.
 
DOWN WITH THE CHURCH OF LAODICEA!

I have to comment that I do not believe in the literal week of creation. As is said in bookoftheBible ?:? "To the Lord, a second is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a second." However, I do believe the creation of everythign happened in those 6 distinct steps.

As per the 6,000 year old earth verse the very very old earth, I have to side with very old, as we have proof there were dinosaurs, but no significant mention of them in the Bible. Also, fossilization can't occur over just 6,000 years. In addition, we have fast amounts of oil beneath the earth, known to be "decomposed fossils," for lack of a better term. There had to be a long period of time to amass such a significant quantity.

But then again, God works in mysterious ways. He knew how valuable fossil fuels would be for us in the 19th-21st century. He could have also created the Dinosaurs and destroyed them and fossilized them in a matter of minutes. It's all up in the air as far as I'm concerned.

As for evolution, pssh. There isn't a SHRED of proof to back the theory. I continually laugh at it. I am looking forward to my biology class next semester and having heated debates with my biology teacher.

As for the politicians, I pity them. Christ said that the church of Laodicea was neither warm nor cold, but lukewarm. Lukewarm was more detestable to Christ than either warm or cold. He even said He SPIT them out of His mouth because they were so foul. If you take the seven churches in Revelation as to be chronological periods of time, you can see that we are in the "Laodicea phase." Look no further than the politicians as evidence.
 
As per the 6,000 year old earth verse the very very old earth, I have to side with very old, as we have proof there were dinosaurs, but no significant mention of them in the Bible. Also, fossilization can't occur over just 6,000 years. In addition, we have fast amounts of oil beneath the earth, known to be "decomposed fossils," for lack of a better term. There had to be a long period of time to amass such a significant quantity.

But then again, God works in mysterious ways. He knew how valuable fossil fuels would be for us in the 19th-21st century. He could have also created the Dinosaurs and destroyed them and fossilized them in a matter of minutes. It's all up in the air as far as I'm concerned.
Check out creation science it proves that all of this can happen in a short period of time.
A few examples off the top of my head:
A fossilized cowboy boot with foot inside.
Coal created from the eruption of Mt. St. Helens when all the trees compressed into each other.
Numerous out of place artifacts embedded within coal deposits.
Fossilized HUMAN footprints beside and occasionally WITHIN dinosaur foot prints.
Job mentions dinosaurs Job 40 & 41 respectively called behemoth and leviathan

When you read some of the creation science and start to break free of your Hellenistic thinking, you will see just how much is possible. The flood is responsible for the bulk of the mysteries that we experience today.
 
As per the 6,000 year old earth verse the very very old earth, I have to side with very old, as we have proof there were dinosaurs, but no significant mention of them in the Bible.

The term "dinosaur" wasn't coined until 1840.
The taxon Dinosauria was formally named in 1840 by English paleontologist Richard Owen, who used it to refer to the "distinct tribe or sub-order of Saurian Reptiles" that were then being recognized in England and around the world. The term is derived from the Greek words deinos meaning "terrible", "fearsome", or "formidable" and saura meaning "lizard" or "reptile". Though the taxonomic name has often been interpreted as a reference to dinosaurs' teeth, claws, and other fearsome characteristics, Owen intended it merely to evoke their size and majesty.
The Bible mentions Leviathans (sea creatures) and Behemoths (land creatures). Remember that 6000 years ago, the earth was pure, people lived for hundreds of years. Logically, the animals of the earth enjoyed a similar life expectancy. Science has proven that lizards grow until the moment they die. Imagine what a 900 year old iguana would look like.

TJ said:
Also, fossilization can't occur over just 6,000 years. In addition, we have fast amounts of oil beneath the earth, known to be "decomposed fossils," for lack of a better term. There had to be a long period of time to amass such a significant quantity.

I believe that this is a false statement. Several common sources claim that there is no minimum time requirement to create a fossil, only a rapid sedimentation over an organism proximal to the time of death. However there are exceptions to this, such as if an organism becomes frozen, desiccated, or comes to rest in an anoxic (oxygen-free) environment such as at the bottom of a lake. Further, if God was able to create dirt, air, and water from nothing, don't you think that He could have created oil from nothing, as well?

TJ said:
As for evolution, pssh. There isn't a SHRED of proof to back the theory. I continually laugh at it. I am looking forward to my biology class next semester and having heated debates with my biology teacher.

Be careful. There is evidence of microevolution - small changes within a species to help it adapt to the environment. Macroevolution on the other hand, infers massive changes within an organism. An example of macroevolution is the appearance of feathers during the evolution of birds from one group of dinosaurs.

I've read a few articles on macroevolution, which claim that religious groups will deny macroevolution exists, while claiming it has already happened. However, I have found no source that can provide even an example. Further, I cannot find a source that can prove that it has occurred. To me, this means that they are acting on concepts and beliefs...hence: faith; albeit a different faith than what drives me.

*edit* Behemoth, thanks Ark. Also added more precise info on the term "dinosaur"
 
Last edited:
If you take the flood into account you will understand why stuff like carbon dating has issues. Carbon dating measures the amount of a certain radiation and attempts to "date" it with an age depending on the amount. If a canopy of water existed it is very likely you would receive much much less radiation.
 
But then again, God works in mysterious ways. He knew how valuable fossil fuels would be for us in the 19th-21st century. He could have also created the Dinosaurs and destroyed them and fossilized them in a matter of minutes. It's all up in the air as far as I'm concerned.

Well said TJ - that's exactly my attitude. My wife (Mirawyn) and I have frequently discussed this issue together. She believes in a literal 7-day creation as well as 'young earth', while I am inclined to believe that the earth is much older. These discussions we have are very interesting and we both enjoy them, because we never accuse each other of ignorance or worldly thinking or not believing in the Bible. And we have both come to understand a strong argument can be made on either side of this issue without abandoning either scripture or science.

Paul
 
Last edited:
I have the Revised and Expanded Answers Book, that comes from people from that site (AiG) I think. It's pretty cool... but my problem with saying that the Genesis account was just a metaphor is that it's like we can suddenly just pick and choose which parts of the Bible we want to believe.
 
You raise some very good points. I guess I haven't researched this as much as I thought. Do you have a good course? My mother spoke of a www.creation*********.org, but she doesn't know what the ********* is.

I don't really have one specific place you can look for information. Parts of things I've learned has been through fellowship and study with other Christians. Parts of it come from my Study Bible. Parts of it come from reading many many many webpages (then comparing them with other websites, two different Bible translations, etc).

It just so happens that I've put a lot of thought into the Creation v Evolution debate.

Literal and figurative stories in the Bible is another thing I've looked at. I struggled with what I was taught, what I believed, and what I was reading/seeing. I believe in the literal reading of the 6-day creation, for the very reason that ChickenSoup posted.

After I struggled with this a long time, I found the verse I posted earlier in the thread:
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, (2 Timothy 3:14-16)
God-breathed. God said it was true. Either you believe God, or you don't. I choose to believe exactly what God spoke, or had others speak. I believe that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, that Lot's wife was turned into a pile of salt, that Moses and Israel crossed the Red Sea and the Jordan/Jericho by parting the waters exactly as God said it would happen. I believe you get the point. :)

As for science? Science tells us so many things are exactly one way, except for this little thing over here....oh, and that exception right there...and... The problem is that science just finds ways to explain things that we see. When they think they have it, they publish papers about why light bends into colors. Until they find a new color or spectrum of light. Then they create rules about how to handle the exceptions that fall outside the explanations they originally created.

Here's a big one. Read up on identifying time periods - they classify stuff they find by where it is in the sediment. They couldn't say that all of "Type1" rock formations are from a single time, because there are examples of "Type1" existing in what geologists have explained as a hundred million years apart. So they cross list the fossils in "type1" rock to show the different ages. So basically, you determine how old the rock is based on what fossils are in it.


Read up on fossils, you'll see that they determine which period or age the fossils came from based on which layer of rock it was in. So they determined when fossils were created based on where they found them.

So the fossil is dated by the rock, which is dated by the fossil. Do you see the circular problem with this kind of science? Who really knows how old the rock is?

Anyway, before I get off track much farther, I'll end the post for now, and bring it back... Don't get all of your information from one place - study the things that interest you and see how it fits what what you think, what you know, what God lays on your heart.

I don't have all the answers. I'm trying to learn the questions first, just like everyone else :)
 
I don't see what the big deal is about this. By what method we got on this planet is completely unrelated to anything having to do with leading the executive branch of the US government.

In fact, it's not even really a main point of Christianity.
 
I think that, as Gov. Huckabee said, the mechanism isn't nearly as important as the attribution. As long as we attribute Creation to God, I don't see a problem with someone holding that the first three chapters of Genesis are figurative. We certainly interpret other parts of the Bible figuratively (the dragon and the ten horns of the beast in Revelation comes to mind).

My personal opinion is that we should interpret the Bible literally unless it is very clear that it is meant to be interpreted figuratively. I believe in the 6-day creation, not because of "hard" science, but based on archaeology that has shown cave paintings of cavemen hunting what are clearly T-Rex and apatosaurs, the existence of modern dinosaurs such as crocodiles and monitor lizards, and because I would rather err on the side of literal interpretation than figurative.
 
That and why would the author of Genesis bother to writer "and it was the first day, evening and morning" or however it was written. I don't see the point of illustrating that an actual day happened when it was supposedly just figurative.
 
With debate it is often quantity over quality when you lack solid evidence. Its like throwing thousands of unarmed troops against a fortress, but the trick is the fortress has to kill them all within a certain time or it becomes real problematic, expecially when aired within a set time limit.

If you know your position is weak you just bring up long, "stuipid" topics that will blow off time.
 
Back
Top