Super Bowl ads and Ham-on-Nye wrap-up. Pat Robertson says Ken Ham needs to give it a rest – surely a sign that the end of western civilization is upon us!!
Listen to the episode | Download this episode | Find this episode on iTunes
Super Bowl ads and Ham-on-Nye wrap-up. Pat Robertson says Ken Ham needs to give it a rest – surely a sign that the end of western civilization is upon us!!
Listen to the episode | Download this episode | Find this episode on iTunes
the church we have been attending for 16 years or so was once a no water baptism group. and no communion. when the pastor started doubting their stance, he pulled away gently. When he retired, he made it a point to keep the church together even with difference of opinion on baptism and communion. baptism and communion services are held at different times than regular worship, so it is not a problem. it was a good thing to see. I agree with Skye Jethani. Know your negociables and your non-negociables. sorry. can’t spell negociable nor nonnegociable. Love you podcast. Now that we have had a chance to read Skye Jethani’s books, can we do another podcast on them?? just a thought. amazing books. I bought extras to share.
Thank you Phil for your great blog and podcast! I’m loving the discussion on Genesis and the origin of the universe/earth/life. Thank you for taking on a very tough subject.
One thing of interest is, it seems that in these discussions among Christians, I don’t see how the question of sin is addressed. If Genesis 1 isn’t a literal account of Creation, how does sin enter the world? And what does that do to Paul’s credibility when he says (inspired by the Holy Spirit) “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, in this way death spread to all men, because all sinned.” (HCSB — I’m a Southern Baptist 🙂 )?
Thank you very much for some great discussion!
Good question. Scholars like John Walton believe Gen 1 is historical, just with its focus on functional rather than material origins. So Adam and Eve are historical, the Fall is historical, etc. No problems there. The tricky part is the doctrine of death – was there animal death before the Fall? That’s where the discussion gets more interesting.
Uncle Phil-It is ‘ the evening and the morning’ not morning to evening. We want to go from darkness into light, not the other way. Just had to get technical about the WORD as you misquoted the WORD. It’s easy to do. You can point out my mistakes any time I make them as well. Probably my interpretation is wrong but it is good to get other perspectives as you like to bring up. Be nice to Pat R. One media guy cutting down another media guy is not nice. You can be just as ‘crazy’. They will know we are Christians by our love. Or to quote John 13:35 “By this shall all (men) know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” Love is kind. Happy Valentines Day. Maybe you think I should eat a sweet tart that says ‘Love is kind.’ Hope you have a good celebration with your wife. Let us know how you continue to keep your marriage a flame. Maybe a topic for next week.?
Just to clarify, Ken Ham did say in his long portion of the debate that even if someone disagreed with him interpretation of Genesis 1 they could still be a Christian because salvation comes through faith in Christ alone. He then laid out a few problems for them to wrestle with but he made it very clear that he doesn’t believe you have to believe in his creation model to be a Christian.
Please don’t stop the theme song (other than noting the fact that it is, in fact, in video). I like seeing and hearing the various voices. Also, keep in mind that while you may have “run out” of voices, most were done pre-video podcast. If anything, get Archibald Asparagus out of the way. Or *maybe* Phillipe Pea, since I’ve always wondered how the heck you did his voice.
I am a new viewer (see, I watch it!) of the podcast and I enjoy listening about these topics! Very interesting stuff, folks! Keep it up!
God bless,
J. Blair
“One of the ways we can check our interpretation is to see how it lines up with what we see in the rest of the world.”
Love this quote. This, I think, is at the heart of those who advocate for a more accepting view of homosexuality within the church. The classic interpretation of the bible in this area doesn’t square with the homosexual people and relationships they see. They see well-adjusted, heterosexual, loving people who had gay parents. They see gay people in long-term committed relationships in which they selflessly give of themselves to their partner. They see homosexuals praying, ministering to the outcasts, praising God, and proclaiming the resurrection of Christ. And this causes them to question the classic biblical interpretation.
I would love to hear how you all would respond to this. I have held the traditional view for my whole life, but am working in a church that is “affirming,” and I am living in the middle of this contradiction. So you could substitute “I” for “they” in the preceding paragraph. I have not found a biblical interpretation that makes sense of both the bible and my experience.
youtube.comPossible topic of discussion: the brave German woman
Bill Nye will always be Speedwalker to me. I can’t take him seriously because I always picture him in his Super hero getup speed walking.
I have been following this debate in the Christian community
since the 1970’s over young earth old earth beliefs . I am
not interested in opinion but , hard science ( provable
hypothesis ) not speculation or extrapolation , which
means show me the facts . I found out about the Creation
Research Institute early on and that it was founded and
run by credentialed ( having degrees ) scientists who
were also highly experienced . They investigated the
facts and evidence in nature and science using a
young earth model as a working hypothesis . Their
books and papers that I’ve read over the last 40 years
have been very technical and very scientifically based .
I have found that there is a great body of evidence
that supports the young earth model . Please
seek out and read the Institute for Creation Research’s
( ICR ) ‘s materials and examine them for yourself .
Hey Phil, Skye and Christian,
I just discovered your podcast by way of the UK podcast “Unbelievable” which is one of my favorite podcasts. They played a short excerpt from when you talked about them. That’s how I found you. You’re show is a gem!
Just an FYI, the original Cheerio’s biracial family commercial wasn’t a Super Bowl ad–oops, I mean, it wasn’t a “big game/superb owl” ad. 🙂 It posted to YouTube last May. And it didn’t show the family actually eating Cheerios. The biracial little girl asks her white mom if it’s true that Cheerios is good for your heart. The mom makes a reference to whole grain oats being heart healthy. The little girl then goes up to her black (oops, I mean African American) dad sleeping on the couch, then pours a box of Cheerios on his chest. Very cute.
Keep up the great work. Looking forward to listening to all of your shows.
Thanks, Ron!
Hey I love your podcast! I think it’s super funny and super insightful. However, I must say I found this podcast slightly disturbing. I do not mind that you hold to an old earth view of creation; I’m not sure myself. However, as one who has read publications by AiG, I must say that you misrepresented him. I have read many of his publications and he is actually a proponent of the scientific method and is very precise in his terms regarding science and philosophy. The creation scientists actually have some evidence for their position! Honestly, I did not watch the debate but several family members did. They agreed that Mr. Ham used the scriptures instead of actual science. On the other hand, I read Ken Ham’s response to some criticism. In which he stated that he had preached the gospel three times and that is nothing to be ashamed of. Furthermore, the reason Mr. Ham is so dogmatic is because there are many parts of the New Testament (such as Jesus discussing marriage and Paul discussing Adam) where the Genesis narrative is mentioned. It is Mr. Ham’s belief that the doctrines of Original Sin only make sense in the light of the first few chapters of Genesis. Maybe he is wrong. Regardless, it is a reasonable opinion to which I believe that you did not do justice.
Thanks again for your awesome podcast.
I wasn’t trying to completely cover Ken Ham’s positions on science – simply summarize the debate with Bill Nye. But I take your point!
I COMMAND YOU TO KEEP THE THEME SONG!!!!!!!!
Hi Phil! I have just started listening to the podcast and am loving it!
I do not see how Christians can accept theistic evolution. How can there be suffering, disease and death for millions of years before Adam and Eve? According to the narrative put forward by evolutionary science, the majority of life, (99.9%!) on this planet would have existed before human beings and any potential “Adam and Eve”. And that existence was not a “very good” but rather an existence of disease, competition for resources, predation, and a whole lot of waste, death and decay. In this scenario,what does human sin have to do with the fall and future redemption of the world? The problem seemed especially pronounced to me after listening to the episode 87, where Skye explains that our hope is found not in being evacuated out of here, but in the belief that God is going to restore this world. Restore this world to what?
What are we supposed to do with Paul’s teaching that death came through the actions of man in Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:21? I always assumed that Romans 8 taught that the Creation was groaning to return to the way it was in Eden, is that an incorrect understanding? Please Phil! Give me a straight forward answer! What was Eden like before sin? How was Creation effected by sin? Does God care about the suffering of animals? Could a good God create a world of waste and death millions of years before creating creatures capable of free will?
It’s easy to be critical (and embarrassed?) with a guy like Ken Ham, and maybe he’s making his argument in the wrong venue, but the theological implications of one’s interpretation of Genesis are crucial!
As a side note: I was so bothered by Bill Nye’s argument that if you let the Creationists have there way, there won’t be any more advances in science, technology, and medicine! We will be plunged into the Dark Ages if you let them get there way! Fear mongering!
Hi Sarah – I would highly recommend you pick up John Walton’s book, “The Lost World of Genesis 1.” You might not agree, but it will explain this point of view very well.
Hey Phil, thanks for recommending John Walton’s book, very interesting and provocative read!
But, ultimately, I don’t think it really addresses my initial questions. John Walton (tucked away in the Q&A section of the book) supposes that dinosaurs and anthropological species could have existed in the long distant, exclusively material, non-functioning past, before Genesis 1. However, I understand why many Christians are reticent to accept this possibility. Whether or not Genesis 1 explains when the Earth began, I am concerned with the theological ramifications produced by accepting the explanations put forth from the scientific community.
What does it say about God that the world is 4.5 billion years old, that sentient beings have been around for 525 million years, and human-like species 2.5 million years? The work of God in the world, his establishing of a people, his reconciling all man-kind to himself, seems inconsequential in this time line.
What does it mean that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, that God is good, that he works through history, that he has concern for his creation if there are millions of years of terrestrial history where God is silent? What significance is modern man, let alone the nation of Israel, if a couple million of years of human history went by before God ever spoke to Abraham? How could God allow suffering, death, and sickness to go on for millions of years before revealing anything about Himself, before sin, before free will? What does it mean to be created in the image of God? Is it something intrinsic or did God arbitrarily assign it to Adam and Eve’s posterity? How could God be good if he only bothered to show up six thousand years ago? How could the bible be ultimate truth if God didn’t care to reveal it to humanity until so late in the game?
Accepting the evolutionary narrative makes Paul’s statement in Romans 8 absurd:
For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God.
And Romans 5:
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned…
Didn’t Jesus physically die? Don’t we believe in a bodily resurrection? Don’t we believe that human sin had an effect on the physical world? If not, then what were the consequences of the sin of Adam and Eve? Is there a relationship between the world before sin and the redeemed world?
And, as far as I can tell, John Walton is an excellent Old Testament scholar, but he isn’t really equipped to answer these questions.
Those are valid questions, and I certainly don’t have compelling answers to all of them. I know Walton believes the death that came through Adam’s sin is spiritual death, just as the life the comes through Christ is spiritual life. (There was obviously physical life before Jesus.) It’s tricky stuff, to be sure.