|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 17, 2011 18:33:25 GMT -5
CHAPTER 21 - Christian Worldview
21.1 Excerpts (first a quote by Eugene Peterson): "God is first presented to us in our Scriptures as a worker, a maker. In the beginning, God went to work." (End Peterson quote) "Since Adam was made in God's likeness, Adam was created to work, even before the fall. Work is good, not evil. ... The sad reality today is that many Christians have a negative perspective on work due, in large measure, to the neglect of the theological point of creation." (Page 422)
"Christians engage many debates about the role of good works inour salvation. Indeed, this single issue helped set off a civilization-wide conflict that has continued to rage for centuries in the Church. ...
"For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in avance for us to do. (Eph. 2:10 NIV)
"Paul does nothing but reiterate the pattern laid down at creation. Christians are re-created in Christ in order to do good works. Creation first, then obedience. New life, then good works. Just like Adam in the garden." (Page 423)
21.2 On page 427-428, the authors quote Isaiah 9:7 from the NIV:
Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this.
Italics added by authors; bolded text by me. My comment: The Kingdom of God is a kingdom ruled by God's chosen/appointed/anointed leaders. It was Adam. And it was Saul, who failed. And it was David. Now it is Jesus.
21.3 Highlighted the bottom half of page 432, which provides a list showing that "Paul referenced the fulfillment of every command Jesus gave in the 'Great Commission.'" Good stuff.
21.4 Page 436: "We hope that by now the reader can understand how young-earth creationism's claims about Genesis and the age of the universe have been a huge credibility issue for the Church."
My comment: No, I don't see it.
Continued, "The real problem is the public, tenacious commitment to a radical change in the physical world at the fall of Adam, a global flood just before the time of Abraham, and a young universe."
My comment: The underlined portions I can accept as false, but not the young earth/universe connection.
After reading the entire book, and actually agreeing with much of it, I still do not see how a young earth is such a problem. I can agree with the covenant creation view of Genesis and with a local flood, but I cannot see why those interpretations must necessarily follow from an old earth paradigm.
|
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 17, 2011 20:37:58 GMT -5
After reading the entire book, and actually agreeing with much of it, I still do not see how a young earth is such a problem. I can agree with the covenant creation view of Genesis and with a local flood, but I cannot see why those interpretations must necessarily follow from an old earth paradigm. Bev, What "old earth paradigm?" We spent time showing how the "old earth paradigm" was just as bad as YEC. YEC claims every molecule and photon in the physical was corrupted by the fall. Scripture requires the fall to be undone. According to the YECs, every molecule and photon still corrupted. When will the corruption end? We are preterists. You don't see the problem with that? I've failed. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 0:38:32 GMT -5
After reading the entire book, and actually agreeing with much of it, I still do not see how a young earth is such a problem. I can agree with the covenant creation view of Genesis and with a local flood, but I cannot see why those interpretations must necessarily follow from an old earth paradigm. Bev, What "old earth paradigm?" We spent time showing how the "old earth paradigm" was just as bad as YEC. YEC claims every molecule and photon in the physical was corrupted by the fall. Scripture requires the fall to be undone. According to the YECs, every molecule and photon still corrupted. When will the corruption end? We are preterists. You don't see the problem with that? I've failed. I don't think you failed, Jeff. And didn't I read a post by you somewhere here recently where you said the universe was billions of years old? Or was that tongue-in-cheek and I didn't realize it? Why can't someone be a YEC, yet not believe the fall of Adam affected the physical creation? Why do those two things have to go together? |
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Mar 18, 2011 9:41:34 GMT -5
What are people's views on statements such as "Cursed is the ground" (Gen 3:17), "the ground which the LORD has cursed" (Gen 5:29), or "You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field" (Gen 3:14)?
How are these things "cursed", or what do you feel they represent? If "ground" represents something else, what does the following passage talk about?
"In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, and you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you shall return." (Genesis 3:17-19)
I won't be arguing anyone's answers because I really have no time for it, but I am interested in what people have to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2011 10:24:42 GMT -5
Morris, all those questions you just asked were answered several times at DeathIsDefeated. I feel for Jeff because he keeps getting asked the same questions over and over again...
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 12:46:48 GMT -5
What are people's views on statements such as " Cursed is the ground" (Gen 3:17), " the ground which the LORD has cursed" (Gen 5:29), or " You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field" (Gen 3:14)? How are these things " cursed", or what do you feel they represent? If " ground" represents something else, what does the following passage talk about? " In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, and you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you shall return." (Genesis 3:17-19) I won't be arguing anyone's answers because I really have no time for it, but I am interested in what people have to say. Hi Sheldon. Even if those verses refer to the actual ground (and I always believed they did), I do not believe that the creation is still cursed today. I believe Genesis 8:20-22 shows that the curse was lifted after the Flood. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2011 13:11:24 GMT -5
Bev, if you believe the cursing of the ground was lifted after the flood, then you must also believe that Adam's curse of Genesis 3:17 was also lifted at that time! Michael Bennett take this position as well...
Genesis 3:17 - And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
I am under the impression that Adam's curse was not removed outside of Jesus Christ. "Thorn" and "thistle" language is very figurative in nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 14:53:45 GMT -5
Bev, if you believe the cursing of the ground was lifted after the flood, then you must also believe that Adam's curse of Genesis 3:17 was also lifted at that time! Michael Bennett take this position as well... Genesis 3:17 - And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; I am under the impression that Adam's curse was not removed outside of Jesus Christ. "Thorn" and "thistle" language is very figurative in nature. Death through sin is removed in Jesus Christ: (Romans 5:12 NASB) Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned-- (Romans 6:23 NASB) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:2 NASB) For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. ---------- Genesis 3:17-19 NASB (17) Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. (18) "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; (19) By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." P.S. Who's Michael Bennett? ... Never mind. I found him. The Sovereign Grace Preterism guy. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 18, 2011 16:08:27 GMT -5
Bev, What "old earth paradigm?" We spent time showing how the "old earth paradigm" was just as bad as YEC. YEC claims every molecule and photon in the physical was corrupted by the fall. Scripture requires the fall to be undone. According to the YECs, every molecule and photon still corrupted. When will the corruption end? We are preterists. You don't see the problem with that? I've failed. I don't think you failed, Jeff. And didn't I read a post by you somewhere here recently where you said the universe was billions of years old? Or was that tongue-in-cheek and I didn't realize it? Why can't someone be a YEC, yet not believe the fall of Adam affected the physical creation? Why do those two things have to go together? Bev, BCS addresses commonly published views on Genesis 1. The YEC view requires : 1) Recent creation of planet earth in 6 24 hour days, as described by Genesis 1. 2) All men are descended from Adam 3) The fall and the curse were the cause of physical death. 4) The flood was global 5) The goal of eschatology is to restore the physical universe to its Edenic state. It is perfectly acceptable to agree with with only part of that list. But if you do not agree to the entire list, then you are not a YEC. If you believe 1), then yes, you believe in a young earth, you are a creationist, but your view has not been developed in print The YEC's won't accept you as one of their own. You will need another name. Similarly, and old earth creationist believes: 1) Physical creation of planet earth in 6 long ages, as described by Genesis 1. 2) All men are descended from Adam 3) The flood was universal in that it killed all men except those on the ark. 4) The goal of eschatology is to make a new physical universe which matches the Edenic state as the YECs imagine it. Notice. Both views have specific details that we both deny. Specifically the goal of eschatology. I deny "physical creation of planet earth ..., as described in Genesis 1." The physical creation of planet earth is not found Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes the creation of something else. I am neither an old earth nor a young earth creationist. I am a covenant creationist. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 18, 2011 16:28:26 GMT -5
Morris, all those questions you just asked were answered several times at DeathIsDefeated. I feel for Jeff because he keeps getting asked the same questions over and over again... Ted, Morris' questions are fine. I really don't have as good an answer for this one as I like. Tami, Ward, and Norm on DeathisDefeated.ning.com are way ahead of me here. Morris, I'm not sure what was cursed. The curse ended in AD 70. The curse was not about physical weeds and physical pain. The weeds of Genesis 3 are the tares of Jesus' parable. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 18, 2011 16:33:12 GMT -5
What are people's views on statements such as " Cursed is the ground" (Gen 3:17), " the ground which the LORD has cursed" (Gen 5:29), or " You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field" (Gen 3:14)? How are these things " cursed", or what do you feel they represent? If " ground" represents something else, what does the following passage talk about? " In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, and you shall eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you shall return." (Genesis 3:17-19) I won't be arguing anyone's answers because I really have no time for it, but I am interested in what people have to say. Hi Sheldon. Even if those verses refer to the actual ground (and I always believed they did), I do not believe that the creation is still cursed today. I believe Genesis 8:20-22 shows that the curse was lifted after the Flood. Bev, Tami, on DeathisDefeated.ning.com has a great article someplace showing that the ground curse was not lifted at the flood. The rest of Scripture contradicts that understanding of Genesis 8. May I point out that the Hebrew translated "curse" is not the same word as used elsewhere? |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 18:54:50 GMT -5
Hi Sheldon. Even if those verses refer to the actual ground (and I always believed they did), I do not believe that the creation is still cursed today. I believe Genesis 8:20-22 shows that the curse was lifted after the Flood. Bev, Tami, on DeathisDefeated.ning.com has a great article someplace showing that the ground curse was not lifted at the flood. The rest of Scripture contradicts that understanding of Genesis 8. May I point out that the Hebrew translated "curse" is not the same word as used elsewhere? I've read Tami's post on this before and I do not agree with her. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 18:57:56 GMT -5
I don't think you failed, Jeff. And didn't I read a post by you somewhere here recently where you said the universe was billions of years old? Or was that tongue-in-cheek and I didn't realize it? Why can't someone be a YEC, yet not believe the fall of Adam affected the physical creation? Why do those two things have to go together? Bev, BCS addresses commonly published views on Genesis 1. The YEC view requires : 1) Recent creation of planet earth in 6 24 hour days, as described by Genesis 1. 2) All men are descended from Adam 3) The fall and the curse were the cause of physical death. 4) The flood was global 5) The goal of eschatology is to restore the physical universe to its Edenic state. It is perfectly acceptable to agree with with only part of that list. But if you do not agree to the entire list, then you are not a YEC. If you believe 1), then yes, you believe in a young earth, you are a creationist, but your view has not been developed in print The YEC's won't accept you as one of their own. You will need another name. Similarly, and old earth creationist believes: 1) Physical creation of planet earth in 6 long ages, as described by Genesis 1. 2) All men are descended from Adam 3) The flood was universal in that it killed all men except those on the ark. 4) The goal of eschatology is to make a new physical universe which matches the Edenic state as the YECs imagine it. Notice. Both views have specific details that we both deny. Specifically the goal of eschatology. I deny "physical creation of planet earth ..., as described in Genesis 1." The physical creation of planet earth is not found Genesis 1. Genesis 1 describes the creation of something else. I am neither an old earth nor a young earth creationist. I am a covenant creationist. Ahh. I see now. Thank you for that explanation! So I am not YEC as defined by BCS, but I still hold to a young earth. I also see the covenant creation aspect of Genesis 1 & 2. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 18, 2011 19:07:55 GMT -5
Ahh. I see now. Thank you for that explanation! So I am not YEC as defined by BCS, but I still hold to a young earth. I also see the covenant creation aspect of Genesis 1 & 2. Bev, You are not YEC as defined by all of the YEC organizations, authors, and creation museums. We used their definition. |
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 18, 2011 19:09:33 GMT -5
I've read Tami's post on this before and I do not agree with her. Bev, If I fully agreed with Tami, I'd have it figured out and wouldn't have needed to send you elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2011 19:39:55 GMT -5
Ahh. I see now. Thank you for that explanation! So I am not YEC as defined by BCS, but I still hold to a young earth. I also see the covenant creation aspect of Genesis 1 & 2. Bev, You are not YEC as defined by all of the YEC organizations, authors, and creation museums. We used their definition. Okay. |
|
