
03-15-2008, 06:43 PM
|
 | Puritanboard Postgraduate | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 4,438
Thanks: 755
Thanked 627 Times in 405 Posts
| |
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMcFadden Quote:
Originally Posted by Davidius | David,
Your citations were excellent! Reading through some of the arguments reminds me that scientifically educated people can make a strong case for and old earth just as some of the yec scientists do on the other side. My contention is not that I have scientific sophistication to albitrate between the two. Rather, I buy the idea that the facts are susceptible to diverse interpretations, based upon one's worldview.
Yes, I know that many committed Christians defend an old earth, and evolution for that matter. The head of the human genome project, Dr. Collins had a bestseller rejecting YEC and ID. Not only that, but it got him an interview on Schuller's Hour of Power and lots of positive press in the evangelical community. His version of theistic evolution, BioLogos, even contains the idea that once evolution got under way no special supernatural intervention was required!!!
However, I believe that a more consistent Christian position reads the Bible in its natural sense, even when dealing with narrative portions of Genesis 1-11. Is it a slam-dunk? Of course not. Can it be defended intellectually? Absolutely! | Thanks!
I agree with your statement that scientific facts are interpreted through the framework of one's worldview. At this point I refuse to even give day-age theory an objective hearing because it seems to destroy systematic theology. Does anyone know how Kline deals with this problem?
__________________
DAVIDIVS DOCTVS VTRIVSQVE LINGVAE
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Currently in the process of transferring membership to an as-yet-undecided church in Chapel Hill
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics
|