‚ÄúI know a lot of people say that I believe the earth is 6,000 years old, and they have no basis for saying that. I don‚Äôt know how old the Earth is,‚ÄĚ Carson said on Monday night. ‚Äú[Genesis] says, ‚ÄėIn the beginning God created the heaven and the earth‚Äô ‚ÄĒ and then there‚Äôs a period there.‚ÄĚ
Carson made these statements after O‚ÄĚReilly asked, ‚ÄúAre you really a creationist?‚ÄĚ to which the retired neurosurgeon said that he believes that ‚ÄúGod is our creator,‚ÄĚ though he did not directly address a potential belief in a historical Adam and Eve as documented in the Old Testament.
‚ÄúI believe in micro evolution. I believe in natural selection. But I have a different take on it,‚ÄĚ Carson said. ‚ÄúThe evolutionists they say there, that‚Äôs proof that the theory of evolution is true.‚ÄĚ
He continued, ‚ÄúI say that‚Äôs proof of an intelligent and caring God who gave His creatures the ability to adapt to their environment so...
Ben maybe not in hot water, but at least a little bit warm water? [URL=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/17/carson-fires-back-on-report-is-taking-time-off-to-promote-book/]]]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/17/carson-fires-back-on-report-is-taking-time-off-to-promote-book/ (Carson fires back on report he is taking time off to promote book)[/URL]
Dr. Thomas Ice quoted and wrote: This is sometimes called the principle of grammatical-historical interpretation since the meaning of each word is determined by grammatical and historical considerations. The principle might also be called normal interpretation since the literal meaning of words is the normal approach to their understanding in all languages. It might also be designated plain interpretation so that no one receives the mistaken notion that the literal principle rules out figures of speech. Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. After all, the very existence of any meaning for a figure of speech depends on the reality of the literal meaning of the terms involved. Figures often make the meaning plainer, but it is the literal, normal, or plain meaning that they convey to the reader.
excerpt from, [URL=http://https://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/DispensationalHermeneutics.html]]]Dispensational Hermeneutics[/URL] You, mean that Chris?
Did that make sense? Ha-ha. Probably too wordy. I know there are metaphors, similitudes, and that we are to study to show ourselves approved, but I just feel like I have to work really, really hard to see certain, seemingly simple things in ways that just don't sink in at times, even after sifting through the various arguments.
Good morning, Mike. I noticed your comment yesterday. I'm glad you brought that up because I often feel like I have to work real hard to see things in other ways when the bible seems so clear on whatever topic. I wish I could think of a biblical example, but one escapes me right now. I don't know if I'm being clear, so let me use a silly example. I'm reading a book, A line in the book reads, "The boy was eating a sandwich". Seems clear and straightforward...nothing mysterious. One day, a group of experts and intellectuals appear and begin arguing that there was no boy and nobody was eating a sandwich. I scratch my head and respond, "Wait, but it says it right here!" They respond saying that even though it says it, it never really happened, or the sandwich was really a pickle, the boy was a metaphor for a daisy, or whatever. This all sounds silly, I know, but the point is that I feel like I am being talked into believing something that I would have to work real hard at to see any other way, and then still left confused when what I had originally read, in the proper context, seemed perfectly simple and made perfect sense.
Supporting old or new earth is not important in politics, but vaccinations are! [URL=http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ben-carson-vaccine-defense]]]Ben Carson Dials Back His Defense Of Vaccine Mandates (VIDEO)[/URL] Shame on you, Ben! [URL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2015/09/17/two-doctors-running-for-president-dont-understand-medicines-most-important-advance/]]]Ben Carson Doesn't Get It: All Our Vaccines Prevent Death[/URL]
Forced vaccination, not immunization. There's a difference.
But any forcing is for citizens of the State, not for citizens of the kingdom of heaven.
Anne wrote: pen, yes he does. He has repeatedly voiced his plans for forced immunization. SDA's perform abortions in their hospitals as well so they don't have an aversion to using fetal cells in vacc serums. Now, should they ever discover that any swine serum has been added... well, them are fightin' words!
Those with no science skills(like Pat Robertson) ask "what about Carbon 14?" Unaware its pervasiveness proves a young earth:
Carbon-14 is Found Everywhere It's Not Supposed To Be: Carbon-14 C14 decays in only thousands of years and therefore cannot last for millions. Thus evolutionists did not expect to find C-14 EVERYWHERE it shouldn't be if the earth were old (Answers 2011). Carbon-14 is found in petrified wood, coal, oil, limestone, graphite, natural gas, marble, deep ground water, dinosaur fossils, and even in supposedly billion-year-old diamonds! A secondary assumption by old-earth scientists proposes that the C-14 in diamonds (coal, etc.) must have come from C-13 and neutron capture. However, 1st, radio activity is concentrated in continental rock (see RSR Prediction below), and 2ndly, relatively speaking, radioactivity is relatively scarce even in the continental crust, at least as documented by this U.S.G.S. report for enormous swatches of land. Thirdly, a geologist with a degree from Colorado's School of Mines who has a background in nuclear physics (who also spent years bombarding various elements with neutrons to make isotopes for industry), explained to RSR that Carbon does not easily absorb neutrons because it is the heavier elements beginning with Sodium...
pen, yes he does. He has repeatedly voiced his plans for forced immunization. SDA's perform abortions in their hospitals as well so they don't have an aversion to using fetal cells in vacc serums. Now, should they ever discover that any swine serum has been added... well, them are fightin' words!
NY Mike, normally I would not have said what I did. Because of my history with the SDA church, I find myself not saying "Oh, I agree with what he said" (which I superficially do most of the time), but instead find myself realizing from where he is speaking from, if that makes any sense... In order to be a "good SDA", you must adhere to specific standards, among those: being a pacifist, confusing the biblical role of men and women (church was founded and supported by EG White and her family, their founder and prophetess), and belief in the "one true church". To me, this is no different than voting in a hardline Catholic or Mormon. I agree with so many of their view points but foundationally there are huge craveses that I cannot ethically and morally fill in.
Now, in all honesty, I probably wouldn't have voted for either King David nor Solomon! Lol! A murderer and an idol worshipper! And yet God's way was, obviously, right! So, again, I am speaking specifically about Carson because of my background with the SDA church.
Mike wrote: some ... rightly demand the Genesis account of beginnings should be taken literally, but the Revelation account of endings should not.
Please, this is an unfounded parallel. One should distinguish between historical, narrative, poetical, descriptive, and didactic genders in literature. Also, the interpretation of any passage is determined by the context of the whole Scripture, comparing spiritual things with spiritual things.
Figures of speech abound in all genders. For instance, one can observe a good amount of figures of speech that have to be taken figuratively in the following didactic passage.
‚ÄúAs an eagle stirs up her nest, flutters over her young, spreads broad her wings, takes them, bears them on her wings: So the LORD alone did lead him ‚Ä¶ He made him ride on the high places of the earth, ‚Ä¶ and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock; Butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with fat of lambs, ... and thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape. But Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked: ... thou art covered with fatness... For their vine is of the vine of Sodom,...Their wine is the poison of dragons, " De 32
Can we imagine a physically/literal obese Jeshurun, etc.... ?
[URL=http://kgov.com/list-of-not-so-old-things]]]Many Hard Science proofs of Young Earth[/URL] For example:
* "6,000 year-old" Mitochondrial Eve: As the Bible calls "Eve... the mother of all living" (Gen. 3:20), genetic researchers have named the one woman from whom all humans have descended "Mitochondrial Eve." But in a scientific attempt to date her existence, they openly admit that they included chimpanzee DNA in their analysis in order to get what they viewed as a reasonably old date of 200,000 years ago (which is still surprisingly recent from their perspective, but old enough not to strain Darwinian theory too much). But then as widely reported including by Science magazine, when they dropped the chimp data and used only actual human mutation rates, that process determined that Eve lived only six thousand years ago! In Ann Gibbon's Science article, "Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock," rather than again using circular reasoning by assuming their conclusion (that humans evolved from ape-like creatures), they performed their calculations using actual measured mutation rates. This peer-reviewed journal then reported that if these rates have been constant, "mitochondrial Eve‚Ä¶ would be a mere 6000 years old."
Mike wrote: Agreed, Christopher. But it is interesting to note some Christians rightly demand the Genesis account of beginnings should be taken literally, but the Revelation account of endings should not. Anne, correct if wrong, but are you saying an articulate honest, intelligent man cannot do any good as president of this republic? I imagine the Christians of the first century might have hoped for such a one. There is nothing in Scripture to indicate they would not have been ok with a peaceable life if he weren't a card carrying believer.
Just food for thought (as I haven't formed a opinion one way or the other)...
The Genesis account is not strictly chronological. Would you say that Revelation is?
Christopher000 wrote: Thanks BRF, and others. Good thoughts. I have no doubt and have no problem, whatsoever, believing in the six day creation. Like Frank said, I think, once we begin to doubt things God meant for us to take literally, it introduces all kinds of other potential problems to follow. When we begin to doubt one jot or one tittle, His Word begins to fall apart before our eyes as doubt begins to seep in. Then it becomes an opinion game...well, ok, I can believe this, but that, no, I don't think that's right, or whatever...take your pick. ---
Agreed, Christopher. But it is interesting to note some Christians rightly demand the Genesis account of beginnings should be taken literally, but the Revelation account of endings should not.
Anne, correct if wrong, but are you saying an articulate honest, intelligent man cannot do any good as president of this republic? I imagine the Christians of the first century might have hoped for such a one. There is nothing in Scripture to indicate they would not have been ok with a peaceable life if he weren't a card carrying believer.
Mike from FL, JW's are an offshoot of the SDA church.
From their "What We Believe" statements: "He created the universe, and in a recent six-day creation the Lord made ‚Äúthe heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them‚ÄĚ and rested on the seventh day."
Notice the word "recent". This leaves the door wide open for a plethora of ideas from micro-evolution, to "adaption", and on and on I had been taught that Dino's were made by Satan and were destroyed by God. Their understanding is weak, at best, and they tend to grasp at a lot of straws to make any validity to their assumptions. It was very frustrating growing up hearing "Well, there are just some tough pieces that are a mystery and we may never know!" I have met Dr. Carson a number of times and he is a very, very nice gentleman; articulate, honest and intelligent. I wouldn't vote for him as president if he was the only one running. His doctrinal background cannot produce good fruit, even if it looks tasty. But that's only my humble opinion.
Oh and Good morning ( here) and Godbless and love to you all, been flat out with work, have some great fellowship guys and please pray for Michelle Charlie and Tonys sister and nephews as there has been a death in the fam.