Skip to content
Boggled Mind wrote:
"It is truly bizarre that some of you guys can clearly read, can clearly spell and write articulate sentences, and apparently are able to successfully navigate normal society, but are yet so completely stark-raving irrational in your thoughts. It's a little frightening how otherwise sane people can be so thoroughly brainwashed. It boggles the mind."
"Can you come up for air from your irrational diatribe long enough to realize you have no right to throw the name of Jesus around as your authority if you're not going to listen to Him? I assure you that you are in error. If you are in any doubt, check with the Lord."
In reading through this entire thread, I can understand why there is a great deal of emotion on both sides. Both sides clearly feel they are speaking for God's truth and are qualified to rebuke the other. Unfortunately, citing Genesis as if it settles the matter begs the question! Devoted followers of Jesus Christ who embrace the verbal plenary inspiration of scripture can nevertheless hold very different understandings of the word YOM in Genesis 1 (including 24 hour day and indeterminate period of time) and even hold to very different understandings of "the evening and the morning was the nth YOM" (whether referring to the boundaries of a single night OR an idiomatic construction of ancient Hebrew). And of course, the Bible says NOTHING about Carbon-14 dating and its role in determining who is the most godly person and devoted follower of Jesus when Christians do battle over these issues.
May I suggest a focus on the scientific evidence (when the conflict is C-14 dating methodology) and the Hebrew Bible evidence (when the conflict is exegetical)? Trading barbs and insults over who has the most compromised intellectual capabilities or the most compromised spiritual condition does little to resolve the matter. And in both cases, a great deal more specifics would be helpful to participants and readers alike. Indeed, in that regard the main article was disappointing because of a frustrating absence of primary source citations. (Indeed, I have found this trend frustration throughout the Creation Moments website and even within its secondary links.)
And how ironic that a complaint of "a little bit of data and a lot of interpretation" appeared within a diatribe that was sadly compromised by exactly that! (Zero data and a lot of emotional attacks---and subjective interpretations which communicated little more than the alleged spiritual superiority of the writer!)
I suppose it also depends upon what is the intended purpose of this website. Is it to educate and inform the visitor *or* is to declare anyone apostate who fails to agree with "our side's" particular interpretation of scripture and God's creation? Statements like "Evolutionists can expect to be wrong about the age of the earth every time" educate no one on any topic other than the writer's disdain for someone who is on "the other side". And I wonder: Is Christ honored in such a declaration?, especially when "evolutionist" is a term that is more epithet than carefully descriptive. (After all, virtually every young earth creationist leader concedes that micro-evolution is evident throughout the biosphere.)
My main purpose in writing is simply to express my disappointment in the venom expressed within some of the comments. Enough said.
More information about formatting options
Copyright 2014 Creation Moments. All Rights Reserved.
August Ash, Inc. -
Minneapolis Web Design