Of course you think hes just throwing rocks at scientists doing the work. He disagrees with you. However, his bio shows that he has a PhD and has extensive work in biochemistry.
He completed a PhD in chemistry with an emphasis in biochemistry at Ohio University, where he twice won the Donald Clippinger Research Award. Postdoctoral studies took him to the Universities of Virginia and Georgia. Fuz then worked seven years as a senior scientist in product development for Procter & Gamble.
I think there is a difference between throwing rocks at scientists doing the work and, as a scientist, examining the work of other scientists and rejecting certain hypotheses about origins of life based on recent findings in biochemistry. You make it sound as if work on protocells is being done to prove the spontaneous generation of life. This is not true. There are medical reasons for the work. Evolutionists are trying to take the results of this research as evidence for their theory of spontaneous generation of life whereas creationists see the same research and point out that it does not support such claims. You are grossly misrepresenting things to the point that it looks deceptive.
As far as my beliefs:
I believe there was a worldwide flood as the Scriptures clearly teach and they are not presented as myth or moral lessons alone.
“if he did not spare the
ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he
brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;” (2 Peter 2:5, ESV)
I believe the ancient genealogies were meant to tie people to significant figures throughout history and were not intended to be all encompassing. Also, I believe that there are many different plausible explanations for an older earth while maintaining belief in the genesis account. Some propose gap theories or different takes on the meaning of Yom (day) in the Genesis account. I don't know that I have reached a final conclusion in this area as each has different strengths and weaknesses. This has not been the focus of my study. I am open to some of these accounts so long as they do not assert the death of human beings prior to the fall or do violence to the intent of the text as a historically accurate record within the scope of its literary purpose.
Thus, I am open to the concept of a very old earth, but not the idea that all species evolved from a single-celled organism over billions of years. I do not think such a process is defendable biblically that suggests God created all creatures according to their kind or that death brought man into the world, rather than the other way around. I think Romans 5 would have to be viewed as a horrible error if such an Darwinian evolutionary view is held.
I believe there was a worldwide flood. I believe that this flood can and does account for some of the geological phenomenon in the world we see today. However, I do not necessary see it as the primary explanation for the apparent age of the earth or as the explanation for everything. My faith does not rest on canopy theories, polar ice caps or dating methods. I do not discount the fact that there are supernatural elements to the flood story. I don't think these elements involve the "cover up" of anything as I don't know that it is necessary to date this flood strictly to 4,000 years ago. It may have been much longer than that. The Bible does not seem interested in dating such periods or events, but it does seem intent on declaring they happened.
In sum, my commitment is to the historical accuracy of the scriptures, understanding that they are an ancient literature and not based in western scientific epistemologies. Clearly, the Genesis accounts were primarily meant to help Israel develop their lives and social structure around the working of God (resting on the 7th day, etc.). However, such literature is meaningless if the stories themselves do not correspond to actual historical events. Therefore, I am flexible in my understanding of modern theories of how things might have transpired in the past to explain what we see today...these are always changing. I am not flexible in my understanding that the Bible is accurate and that it should be accepted according to the intent of the inspired author. There is nothing I can see in the Biblical accounts of the flood that suggest the event did not happen at all or that it was simply a localized event.
Allow me to sum up my position with regards to geocentrism. The fault of geocentrists was that they were taking poetic descriptions of the cosmos as efforts to explain the universe scientifically. Moreover, other such descriptions of the cosmos were more likely depictions of various temples as ancient temples were built as depictions creation. Their religion was built around a depiction of the created world...and so these descriptions were often more religious than scientific (see GK Beale's The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism). So it is one thing to read a Psalm that speaks of the "foundation of the earth" and understand that this is a poetic way of talking about the permanent nature of the created order God has established and another thing to say that entire events depicted in the Bible are not only false but that they were taken from other religions as a means of developing their own religious stories of Yahweh off the backs of the Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. There is no doubt that the literature of Genesis is antithetical to the religions of the Cannaanites and so forth in its language and depiction, and may have been written in a particular fashion as an apology against such foreign stories, but this does not mean the events were fabricated or the stories were borrowed. In the same way, Mark borrows phrases that were used of Caesar and attached them to Jesus. This does not mean that Jesus never existed, but that the literature was put together in such a way to turn people's trust from Caesar to Christ. So, we have to allow for literary devices to be sure, but if the literature is not based on reality, then we might as well just put it aside altogether.
So do you. Unless you believe that one day all the stars will fall to the earth, there is a mountain from which all the earth can be seen simultaneously, the cure for leprosy is the blood of birds, it really is an abomination to God to wear a cotton-polyester blend shirt, killing infants is perfectly fine if God tells you to do it, etc.
This has nothing to do with our discussion. Again, this is a failure on your part to understand literary devices as well as the covenant God made with Israel and the historical setting of the ancient world behind the wars and commands of God to Israel. I do believe God gave commands to kill. Again, I think you are allowing modern sensitivities to determine what you will accept in an ancient text that depicts the scenarios of an ancient world very different from our own.
So all of Jesus' parables were about actual people and real events?
RJ, this is what I mean by you needing to define your hermeneutics. I read the Bible much like I read a newspaper. If I read a breaking news story, I read it as a literal, historical event. If I read a comic, I read it as a funny pretend story that makes a point or creates humor. The Bible is no different. There are different genres. When Jesus tells a parable (para-bole - literally "to throw alongside") it is a story with the purpose of making a point alongside of the current discussion taking place. If I read a Proverb, it is understood that this is general wisdom from God of how life generally operates. Because the Proverb says, "Train a child in the way they should go, and when he is old, he will not soon depart from it." does it mean that no child will ever turn away from their parents teaching? No...but generally speaking, if you train a child correctly, they will hold to those principles which will benefit their lives. The same is true with other warnings about drunkenness and so forth. The literature is not about declaring that every statement is always true for every person in every situation. It is saying that if you hold to these principles, they will bless and benefit your life because this is what God blesses and what God desires. So, a parable told by Jesus and a command given by Paul are two different genres and need to be read as they are presented. So, if you are going to claim the Genesis flood is simply a parable or a pretend story to make a point, you need to explain how the literature gives us this indication that the story is not intended to be historical but merely parabolic, a metaphor or whatever. I do not see anyway to understand this narrative in the Scripture as anything but a historical account of an actual event.
Now you sound exactly like a fundamentalist. "The Bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it". That's fine for you, but not everyone shares that mindset.
I do believe the Bible. I believe that while it must be understood and interpreted according to the varying types of literature it is presented in, it is God's revelation to humanity, it is true and it is to be believed and obeyed. I believe it even makes such claims about itself:
“And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:19–21, ESV)
Its either true or not. I am a Christian. I believe the Bible is God's Word. If that makes me an ignorant, Bible-thumping, fundamentalist in your mind, so be it.
Perhaps, but one thing I wonder...is it your belief that the Hebrews were 100% immune from being influenced in any way at all by the cultures around them?
No. I believe those influences are evident in the Scripture. But the Scripture is the product of the Spirit. While the Spirit communicated in cultural contexts that certainly have various influences and situations being addressed, the fundamental principles and narratives in the Bible are true and revelations from God...not just random jottings from common, everyday, culturally-bound Hebrews.
