Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Ken Ham Today: Verdict and Recommendation!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    ... Isn t that what we have been saying all along, and doesn t that explain why young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Wasn't Ken Ham recently whining about being misrepresented; and now he comes with this misrepresentation? Also, Ken has still not responded regarding my invitation that he take up my "Goliath of GRAS" argument. Here's the gist of the following article, as taken from the text of the article:

      > "God's Word clearly teaches a young
      > earth and that settles the matter".

      Isn't that what "we" have been saying all along, and doesn't that explain why young-earth creation-science promoters have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges!

      - RLBaty

      ------------------------------------------------------

      http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/oect/verdict-recommendations

      The Verdict and Recommendations
      Chapter 9

      by Tim Chaffey and Jason Lisle
      March 1, 2012

      (excerpts)


      The Lord holds Christians to a high standard,
      and so does the world.

      The use of uninformed and misleading arguments
      does not bring honor and glory to the name of
      Christ.

      Only when fellow believers are treated with
      respect and dignity will progress be made in
      this important debate.

      Christians have no need to compromise the Word
      of God with the opinions of man.

      When science can help clarify gray areas of
      Scripture, then it should be used cautiously;
      this is called the

      > "ministerial role of science."

      However, science should never be set up as equal
      to or above Scripture; that is, science should
      never be used in a

      > "magisterial role."

      Old-earthers are charged with compromise in
      the area of the age of the earth and the
      extent of the Flood.

      They have accepted the majority view among
      scientists and have attempted to make the
      Bible fit this view.

      Yet the Bible cannot incorporate these views
      without contradicting itself.

      As such, these views cannot be correct.

      Old-earth creationists are hereby found guilty
      of compromise concerning the age of the earth
      and the extent of the Flood.

      However, old-earthers are sternly warned to
      stop trying to accommodate the false philosophies
      of the day and learn to fully trust in the Word
      of the omniscient God.

      Recommendations for Improving the Debate

      Debate can be healthy for the Church.

      There are three major areas that must be
      worked on from both sides of this debate.

      Only then can "iron sharpen iron" (Prov. 27:17).

      First, both sides need to practice academic
      integrity.

      Christians need to continue to develop scientific
      models that fit the evidence.

      For example, Dr. Russell Humphreys' white hole
      cosmology uses the scientific data available today
      to construct a viable framework that is consistent
      with the evidence.

      Dr. John Baumgardner has used computer modeling to
      demonstrate rapid plate tectonic movement as a result
      of the Flood.

      Further scientific research in these fields and
      others can only help the young-earth creationist
      movement.

      For the old-earther, this recommendation will be
      a tougher pill to swallow.

      The many weak and misleading arguments refuted in
      this book must be abandoned.

      Old-earthers must learn to base their theories on
      the words of Scripture rather than on fallible men
      whose theories are constantly changing.

      Old-earth creationists must also stop using arguments
      that have already been answered by mainstream
      young-earth organizations.

      Finally, academic integrity demands that old-earthers
      stop attacking the arguments made by those on the fringe
      of young-earth creationism and treating them as if they
      are the mainstream arguments.

      They need to deal directly with the arguments from the
      leading young-earth organizations, such as The Institute
      for Creation Research, Answers in Genesis, and The
      Creation Research Society.

      Second, personal attacks are unnecessary and unbiblical.

      Perhaps the most frustrating part of any debate occurs
      when one or both sides resort to ad hominem attacks to
      advance their particular agenda.

      Arguments should be evaluated on their merit, and not
      on the person making the claim.

      In the same way, old-earthers must refrain from
      labeling young-earth creationists as unscientific
      and on a level of those who hold to geocentricity
      and a flat earth.

      Christians, both old-earth and young-earth, should
      be above this type of argumentation.

      Finally, old-earthers must endeavor to develop a
      coherent theological position that is consistently
      supported by Scripture.

      We contend that it is not possible to do this
      within an old-earth framework.

      However, old-earth creationists are welcome to
      attempt to refute our position using legitimate
      hermeneutics, sound logic, and appropriate ministerial
      use of science.

      Rather than basing their view on questionable or
      unlikely interpretations of the text, they must
      show that the Bible provides strong support for
      their view.

      Old-earth creationists must be able to conclusively
      demonstrate that Scripture repeatedly not only allows
      for, but also implies, an age of the earth in excess
      of 10,000 years.

      Non-specific comments about the antiquity of the
      universe simply do not accomplish this.

      What the old-earth creationist has to be able to
      show is that the Bible speaks clearly for his or
      her position and at the same time conclusively
      against the young-earth view.

      This has never been accomplished.

      (I)t is clear that young-earth creationism is the
      only viable biblical position.

      It has the support of the New Testament writers and
      the majority of leaders throughout Church history.

      It even has the backing of our Lord Jesus Christ.

      It is time for pastors, professors, and laypeople
      to stop being intimidated by arguments for an old
      earth.

      God's Word clearly teaches a young earth and that
      settles the matter.

      Final Thought

      (O)ld-earth creationism simply cannot stand up to
      biblical and scientific scrutiny.

      As such, it must be rejected.

      We hope that you have read enough to convince you
      that the young-earth position is the only viable,
      biblical stance one can take.

      However, if you have not changed your mind, we
      encourage you to help improve this debate by
      utilizing sound arguments in a loving manner.

      The billions of years and evolutionary theories
      are simply houses of cards.

      When dealing with the question of the age of the
      earth, the best place to find answers would be
      from a history book.

      In the Book of Genesis, the Bible provides a record
      of the very beginning of time and space.

      His record shows that He made everything during a
      span of six days of approximately 24 hours each and
      that this occurred about 6,000 years ago.

      Let's Get Practical

      Often we have been told that it just is not that
      important because it is not practical or is merely
      a side issue.

      Before jumping to this conclusion, please consider
      the following real-life testimony of one of the
      authors (Tim).

      Cancer has affected the lives of so many people.
      It nearly took my life and has harmed or killed
      millions of people and animals around the world.

      Yet, if the old-earth view is correct, then cancer
      must be "very good."

      Think about how this attacks the goodness and
      holiness of God!

      We know that cancer is not "very good."

      I can tell you from personal experience that it
      is an awful disease.

      Fortunately, most old-earth creationists do not
      carry out their viewpoint to its logical conclusion.

      If somebody accepts unbiblical teaching, such as
      old-earth creationism, then he accepts an unbiblical
      view of God.

      Nothing could be more practical than making sure
      that our view of God is correct.

      It is time for the Church to stop compromising with
      an unbiblical theology that views God as a God of
      death, disease, and suffering.

      It is time to stop compromising the clear words of
      God's inspired Word and start trusting fully in what
      He said He did.

      Support AiG.

      ------------------------------
      ------------------------------
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.