Joel Hunter on the Dangers of Preaching on Genesis

[fish5133]

Ive edged away from a literal take on Genesis 1 v1 partly because of the recent "Creationist" teachings from the likes of Ken Ham, Kent Hovind etc. Hams deliberate hiding of Spurgeons belief in millions years (although Spurgeon held to a literal 6 day creation/reshaping) and Hovinds imprisonment for defrauding tax man didnt help their cause. I personaly find a deeper teaching coming out of Genesis when i dont narrow it. Thankfully my eternal security is not dependant on it but on HIM

[xxpowwowbluexx]

He is not very clear here as to what he is saying.

[frozenjafa]

"We further deny that inerrancy is negated by Biblical phenomena such as a lack of modern technical precision, irregularities of grammar or spelling, observational descriptions of nature, the reporting of falsehoods, the use of hyperbole and round numbers, the topical arrangement of material, variant selections of material in parallel accounts, or the use of free citations"

Was the Bible ever intended to be "true" in the modern scientific definition?? Ahh no. There was no such thing as science

[frozenjafa]

danephillips, what is your problem? Can't anyone think about their faith in a different way? Dr Hunter never denied the truth of scripture or the Nicene Creed. Don't be afraid of science, and don't be dogmatic about your personal take on Scripture.

Paragraph from the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy XIII:

"We deny that it is proper to evaluate Scripture according to standards of truth and error that are alien to its usage or purpose.

[danephillips]

Romans 3-12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,

[danephillips]

Read St.John chapter 1 God created all things .For by Him [Jesus] all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him (Colossians 1:16).

[99minerkc]

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although "feeble" souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous "egotisms".

(Albert Einstein)

[celal777]

this speaker seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth. the issue is : do you accept the Bible as the final authority ? if you don't then you will, like this speaker, waffle here and there with gibberish talk about "giving permission" to people with bigger brains etc etc etc. bottom line : unbelief is sin.

[conformingrebel]

@celal777 So you can't accept the Bible as final authority and still believe in evolution? That's just silly. How the world was created was not the most important part of Genesis.

[tgamerlegend]

@conformingrebel One just has to believe in Jesus Christ and put there trust in him to be saved but evolution directly contradicts the Bible if you are talking about macro evolution. If people believe in Macro evolution that could kill there belief about genesis and then that could just go on and on and then they might not even believe the Bible. Godbless.

[Richelieu20]

@tgamerlegend First, it's "their" and not "there". And you're right, people could lose their belief in Genesis if they, like you, read Genesis incorrectly. However, the correct way to read the text is that Genesis is written to explain that God is the creator of the universe, that he desires a relationship with humans, and that we rebelled against, and now we live in a fallen world. BUT I still trust the science that claims macro evolution is responsible for the diversity of life.

[Chiangmai007]

@celal777 I think you would do well to read some of the work of Cambridge theoretical physicist / Anglican priest John Polkinghorne and Harvard astrophysicist Owen Gingerich. Both men are deeply committed Christians.  It was John's writings in particular that helped me to see how bad the theology and science was that drives the creationist agenda...an agenda I once parroted with the best of them. Please google the video of Robert Wright's interview John Polkinghorne for starters...

[celal777]

@Chiangmai007 :well thank you for the recommendation. i did in fact locate the 45 minute Robert Wright interview and watched it all the way through. Polkinghorne had many interesting things to say ; but, what in fact he did say regarding biology was quite disappointing. He made some kind of strange analogy between genetical mutations that favourably lead to an improvement of the species and those that cause cancer. --- really quite ridiculous comments to make if one keeps in view --(continued)

[celal777]

@celal777 (contiuned from previous post) --the Biblical doctrine of the fall and also the fact that most mutations do not lead to any improvements in any species.

[fenoglios]

A well spoken fellow.