Young Earth/Old Earth

[TB2]

Its not that..... It just seems you are holding back things we would need to know before answering you.

One question being answered may help better understand your inquiries.

How long have you been a student of the Bible?

I ask that, because somethings you ask are the kind of questions a new believer may ask.
Yet, you also seem to have a background in your own long term study in areas we do not think much about.

What am I holding back? What questions have I not answered

You know my views on evolution, you know my views on scientific concordism vs Divine Accommodation. You know my views on the fossil record. You know my views on how I think Genesis should be interpreted. And I even have a thread I started where I essentially give my life story

 

[GeneZ]

What am I holding back? What questions have I not answered

You know my views on evolution, you know my views on scientific concordism vs Divine Accommodation. You know my views on the fossil record. You know my views on how I think Genesis should be interpreted. And I even have a thread I started where I essentially give my life story

Do you believe the gift of tongues is for the Church today?

If so? Why.

 

[TB2]

Do you believe the gift of tongues is for the Church today?

If so? Why.

I believe all the gifts are for today (including tongues, but not simply the gifts but the empowering presence of God's Spirit; it's not about the gift but the Giver) (See NT scholar Gordon Fee's book on the subject God's Empowering Presence). For Paul, the Christian life and church was all about the Spirit-filled life. It is the Spirit that is the identifying defining mark of the believer (vs the "natural man") and identifying attribute of the church.

In Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost Peter says this is to fulfill what Joel says will happen in the "last days" when God will pour out His Spirit on all flesh and sons, and daughters, and old men... will have visions and dream dreams

It doesn't make sense that God would pour out His Spirit in the "last days," then take the Spirit back, and pour out the Spirit again in the "last last days."

(Those are a few of the reasons. Gordon Fee's 900 page book pretty much details what and why I accept this)

"Fee's book is the most comprehensive treatment available of Paul's understanding of the Holy Spirit, a topic that has rarely received sufficient attention in studies of Pauline theology. Fee's method is exemplary: he first analyzes Paul's statements about the Spirit, in each individual letter, and then moves to a synthesis of Paul's general pneumatology. The result is a book that is deeply exegetical, doing justice both to the particularity of Paul's writings and to the fundamental unity of his vision for the Spirit's role in the life of the Christian community. Most importantly, Fee emphasizes insistently that the Holy Spirit must be experienced as a living presence within the church. That message is both faithful to Paul and urgent for the community of faith in our time."--Richard B. Hays, professor of New Testament, Duke University Divinity School

Thank you for your question

 

[prism]

See NT scholar Gordon Fee's book on the subject God's Empowering Presence

Thanks @TB2 for the tip

 

[TB2]

Thanks @TB2 for the tip

Gordon Fee's God's Empowering Presence is a 900 page scholarly work of biblical exegesis on every single reference Paul makes to the Spirit.

If that sounds daunting you might want to start with his hundred or so page scaled down version of the 900 page book called "Paul, the Spirit and the People of God"

 

[prism]

Gordon Fee's God's Empowering Presence is a 900 page scholarly work of biblical exegesis on every single reference Paul makes to the Spirit.

If that sounds daunting you might want to start with his hundred or so page scaled down version of the 900 page book called "Paul, the Spirit and the People of God"

He says in it he tries to walk a fine line between the academic and the pastoral. It will be fine, I've tackled other 'thick' theological books before, but admittedly I lean towards the pastoral side of things. Thanks once again.

 

[TB2]

Something that may (or may not) be of interest... @Dave_Regenerated @GeneZ @CrowCross @David1701 @EarlyActs @DialecticSkeptic @Manfred @prism and anyone else I missed

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

On a separate (non controversial note) earlier this week I had the opportunity to have a two hour conversation with Barrie Schwortz, a leading expert on the Shroud of Turin and one the few alive today who has physically examined and handled the Shroud. On top of that, Barrie is a Jew who believes (on the basis of the evidence) that the Shroud is the authentic burial shroud of the historical Jesus of Nazareth, and he brought me up to date on current research (for one I had no idea that the 1988 radiocarbon dates have been debunked). Whatever your personal views on the subject you'll find Barrie's story a fascinating one. Here is a link to those resources including Barrie's recent interview on the Glen Beck Show:

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

 

[prism]

Something that may (or may not) be of interest... @Dave_Regenerated @GeneZ @CrowCross @David1701 @EarlyActs @DialecticSkeptic @Manfred @prism and anyone else I missed

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

On a separate (non controversial note) earlier this week I had the opportunity to have a two hour conversation with Barrie Schwortz, a leading expert on the Shroud of Turin and one the few alive today who has physically examined and handled the Shroud. On top of that, Barrie is a Jew who believes (on the basis of the evidence) that the Shroud is the authentic burial shroud of the historical Jesus of Nazareth, and he brought me up to date on current research (for one I had no idea that the 1988 radiocarbon dates have been debunked). Whatever your personal views on the subject you'll find Barrie's story a fascinating one. Here is a link to those resources including Barrie's recent interview on the Glen Beck Show:

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

For one, I put little weight on things like the Shroud and/or Noah's Ark because...

Luke 16:31 BSB
Then Abraham said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets (God's Word), they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead. ( Things like the Shroud, Noah's Ark etc.)

 

[GeneZ]

Something that may (or may not) be of interest... @Dave_Regenerated @GeneZ @CrowCross @David1701 @EarlyActs @DialecticSkeptic @Manfred @prism and anyone else I missed

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

On a separate (non controversial note) earlier this week I had the opportunity to have a two hour conversation with Barrie Schwortz, a leading expert on the Shroud of Turin and one the few alive today who has physically examined and handled the Shroud. On top of that, Barrie is a Jew who believes (on the basis of the evidence) that the Shroud is the authentic burial shroud of the historical Jesus of Nazareth, and he brought me up to date on current research (for one I had no idea that the 1988 radiocarbon dates have been debunked). Whatever your personal views on the subject you'll find Barrie's story a fascinating one. Here is a link to those resources including Barrie's recent interview on the Glen Beck Show:

*UPDATE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN *

One thing that I believe those who get excited about the shroud is that the Bible tells us his beard was ripped off his face, and that he was so disfigured he became unrecognizable as a man.

​

Just as there were many who were appalled at him — his appearance was so disfigured ​

beyond that of any human being and his form marred beyond human likeness." Isaiah 52:14​

I would not want to see how he looked when they wrapped that shroud over his face.

And, not to mention. We have been warned to no longer know him after the flesh.

Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have ​

known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. " 2 Cor 5:16​

​

The shroud seems to be an effect to know him after the flesh. What they do with the shroud reminds me of the Catholic practice
of having relics of dead saints...

​

​

 

[TB2]

One thing that I believe those who get excited about the shroud is that the Bible tells us his beard was ripped off his face, and that he was so disfigured he became unrecognizable as a man.

​

Just as there were many who were appalled at him — his appearance was so disfigured ​

beyond that of any human being and his form marred beyond human likeness." Isaiah 52:14​

I would not want to see how he looked when they wrapped that shroud over his face.

And, not to mention. We have been warned to no longer know him after the flesh.

Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have ​

known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. " 2 Cor 5:16​

​

The shroud seems to be an effect to know him after the flesh. What they do with the shroud reminds me of the Catholic practice
of having relics of dead saints...

​

​

As a scientist I approach the Shroud as a scientist. I recommend at least going to the link and learning more about it and the latest research. The three dimensional spatial data contained in the image continues to baffle and defy explanation. I can tell you this: it is not a man made creation because no one had the technology then and no one has the technology today to replicate the image. So I see two options: it's either some strange fluke of nature, some strange natural phenomenon we don't know about or it actually is Christ's burial shroud and a modern day witness to his resurrection

 

[EarlyActs]

More of that YEC false propaganda. You're fighting the wrong person

Just to be clear: 'Palle' was the one drifting toward 'evolve-thinking' not you. I know it is extra work, but once again, I have no idea what 'YEC false propaganda' is in this exchange (btw propaganda is by nature false). He showed me a Ted Talk that he said proved spontaneous life was easy.

'Palle' didn't know what pantheism was (transformational Marxism has buried it) but he was quite sure he was not one.

 

[GeneZ]

As a scientist I approach the Shroud as a scientist. I recommend at least going to the link and learning more about it and the latest research. The three dimensional spatial data contained in the image continues to baffle and defy explanation. I can tell you this: it is not a man made creation because no one had the technology then and no one has the technology today to replicate the image. So I see two options: it's either some strange fluke of nature, some strange natural phenomenon we don't know about or it actually is Christ's burial shroud and a modern day witness to his resurrection

True...

But whatever that image is? It was made prior to his ascension and GLORIFICATION...

In other words? We do not know what He looks like now in Heaven.

What happened can be seen as a sign like the torn curtain in the temple.

Keep in mind also. He was resurrected in his body of this earth. He was not yet glorified.
He now has a body of Heaven.

There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of ​

the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another." 1 Cor 15:40​

Jesus's body on earth was sinless version of Adam.
His body consisted of the elements of the earth.
That body could die as witnessed to on the Cross.

Heaven is eternal, and the substance of our heavenly bodies (will be just like his own) will not be able to die.

We are in for something that presently is beyond what we can dream or imagine.
And, its going to be matter of factly REAL to us.

This life will seem so insignificant when it comes....

grace and peace ..............

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

As a scientist I approach the Shroud as a scientist. I recommend at least going to the link and learning more about it and the latest research. The three dimensional spatial data contained in the image continues to baffle and defy explanation. I can tell you this: it is not a man made creation because no one had the technology then and no one has the technology today to replicate the image. So I see two options: it's either some strange fluke of nature, some strange natural phenomenon we don't know about or it actually is Christ's burial shroud and a modern day witness to his resurrection

You keep on saying you are a "scientist", but that is practically meaningless. A scientist in what field? What science do you study?

The Shroud of Turin, like other Catholic relics, display supernatural characteristics because they are the product of demons. The Shroud is a one piece cloth from head to feet that is 2 dimensional, whereas John's Gospel (I believe it is Johns) says that the burial cloths on Jesus were in two pieces, one for the body and another for the head. So clearly from that fact alone it is easy to deduce the Shroud of Turin is fake.

I believe you could be a bit naive. I certainly would have trouble having confidence in a person that claims to be a scientist and falls for something like the Turin Shroud. Are you a Catholic?

 

[CrowCross]

You keep on saying you are a "scientist", but that is practically meaningless. A scientist in what field? What science do you study?

The Shroud of Turin, like other Catholic relics, display supernatural characteristics because they are the product of demons. The Shroud is a one piece cloth from head to feet that is 2 dimensional, whereas John's Gospel (I believe it is Johns) says that the burial cloths on Jesus were in two pieces, one for the body and another for the head. So clearly from that fact alone it is easy to deduce the Shroud of Turin is fake.

I believe you could be a bit naive. I certainly would have trouble having confidence in a person that claims to be a scientist and falls for something like the Turin Shroud. Are you a Catholic?

You had said...."because they are the product of demons."

Why would the demons try to prove Jesus resurrected?

 

[EarlyActs]

The BIBLE says "the fountains of the deep." Why don't you just kindly re-explain what you're trying to say about the fountains of the deep in the atmosphere because there are a lot of comments and it's easy to misunderstand.

I've already told you my position on the fountains of the deep many, many times. You've keep saying it means something else. I disagree. So there we are.

Do you understand that the apostles wrote from the view that the surface (our dwelling place) of earth had been 'baptized' I Pet 3? That means it was sunk and then raised.

The fountains burst gobs of water into the upper atmosphere (I'm not aware of any ancient allusion to a fountain that did not orient upwards).

This is why, shortly after, there is receding waters as in Ps 104, 'the mountains were raised.'

You cannot say this is far-removed from reality. Polar ice samples are turbid, rather than clear. Since you have never mentioned it, I'm not sure you have seen the 23 min animation by Genesis Apologetics, but it is not alone; it just seems to have been the most thoroughly integrated model. Even the BBC has produced animation material on 'stages' of the same. You may prefer the verbal and the digital information, but by nature we are talking about something way too big and complex for that. I suggest that someone like Ager might think totally different had he been able to see and digest an animation.

Please distinguish between me and YEC. I have no idea the age of the earth, only that it had a RCW, a recent creation week. 2 Peter 3 contrasts 'ekpalai' about the universe with 'sunestosa' about earth, by and through water. Velikovsky has an explanation for high year-counts based on his collision as well, so the figure @10K years ago for this massive Cataclysm event is plausible.

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

You had said...."because they are the product of demons."

Why would the demons try to prove Jesus resurrected?

It's just a distraction from the Gospel and focussing on supernatural phenomena instead of God. And it is used by the Catholic church to prove that the Roman Catholic Church is true. All of which, as an answer to your question, has nothing to do with the points I made about the burial cloth showing a discrepancy with the Biblical account of them. Would you like to deal with that?

 

[TB2]

Please distinguish between me and YEC. I have no idea the age of the earth, only that it had a RCW, a recent creation week

Thank you for the clarification and I apologize.

Do you understand that the apostles wrote from the view that the surface (our dwelling place) of earth had been 'baptized' I Pet 3? That means it was sunk and then raised.

The fountains burst gobs of water into the upper atmosphere (I'm not aware of any ancient allusion to a fountain that did not orient upwards).

This is why, shortly after, there is receding waters as in Ps 104, 'the mountains were raised.'

Even if what you say is true it still doesn't comport with the geologic/paleontological record.

You cannot say this is far-removed from reality. Polar ice samples are turbid, rather than clear.

So are the ice cubes in my freezer. There are a thousand different things that can cause that. Turbid ice = GLOBAL FLOOD is a conclusion that does not automatically follow. The point is much much more than that is needed.

Also, one of the problems is how ad hoc flood theories are. Have you ever noticed how they account for *everything* in the fossil record? Turbid ice, GLOBAL FLOOD. Clear ice (because we have that too), GLOBAL FLOOD; mixed sediments, GLOBAL FLOOD; non mixed discrete sediments, GLOBAL FLOOD; high energy rapid catastrophic scouring and deposition of sandstones and conglomerates, GLOBAL FLOOD; NON-catastrophic low energy quiet water slow growth reefs and stromatolites in low energy shales, silts, mudstones, carbonates, dolomites, limestones (60-70% of the sedimentary record consists of low energy NON-catastrophic deposits!), GLOBAL FLOOD ("That was when the flood ebbed for a bit"). The problem is flood geologists have no objective criteria and so everything can be made to fit in a flood model because (no matter how mutually contradictory the circumstances) they've already predetermined their own conclusion. That's why it's not science.

 

[TB2]

But whatever that image is? It was made prior to his ascension and GLORIFICATION...

It would still be the glorified resurrection body

In other words? We do not know what He looks like now in Heaven.

Agreed

 

[TB2]

You keep on saying you are a "scientist", but that is practically meaningless. A scientist in what field? What science do you study?

The Shroud of Turin, like other Catholic relics, display supernatural characteristics because they are the product of demons. The Shroud is a one piece cloth from head to feet that is 2 dimensional, whereas John's Gospel (I believe it is Johns) says that the burial cloths on Jesus were in two pieces, one for the body and another for the head. So clearly from that fact alone it is easy to deduce the Shroud of Turin is fake.

I believe you could be a bit naive. I certainly would have trouble having confidence in a person that claims to be a scientist and falls for something like the Turin Shroud. Are you a Catholic?

I am not Catholic

My specialty areas are biology, paleontology, and science education

The Shroud is not my direct area of expertise, which is why I spoke with Barrie Schwortz (who is not even Christian, but a Jew who accepts the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial shroud of the historical Jesus based on the evidence); spoke with Barrie Schwortz directly this past Monday (who *is* a recgonized leading world expert on Sindonology/the Shroud of Turin) and had him review my "Update on the Shroud of Turin" post for accuracy before I posted it. My post contained one error that I fixed before posting. The link above includes a link to Barrie's non profit Stera which includes hundreds of citations to documented published peer reviewed scientific studies. The Shroud of Turin is the most intensely studied artifact in human history. Don't let anti Catholic sentiment deter you from learning about it. The vast majority of scientific publications on the Shroud of Turin have absolutely no connection to the Catholic church. Best.

 

[TB2]

The Shroud is a one piece cloth from head to feet that is 2 dimensional, whereas John's Gospel (I believe it is Johns) says that the burial cloths on Jesus were in two pieces, one for the body and another for the head

Yes, the Sudarium of Oviedo is believed to be that second head cloth. Less study has been done of it but if memory serves the blood stains match the Shroud. I will ask Barrie and get back to you