tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post3038661079960370038..comments2024-03-17T08:25:33.806+00:00Comments on Thoughts of Francis Turretin: Genesis and Theistic EvolutionTurretinfanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-62842321317964774402010-05-19T04:57:13.118+01:002010-05-19T04:57:13.118+01:00John
ἐπίγνωσις
epignōsis
ip-ig'-no-sis
Fr...John<br /> <br />ἐπίγνωσις<br />epignōsis<br />ip-ig'-no-sis<br />From G1921; recognition, that is, (by implication) full discernment, acknowledgement: - (ac-) knowledge (-ing, -ment).<br /><br />verses: 2, 3, 8<br /><br /> γνῶσις<br />gnōsis<br />gno'-sis<br />From G1097; knowing (the act), that is, (by implication) knowledge: - knowledge, science.<br /><br />verses 5, 6, 20 <br /><Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-64816080598319423902010-05-19T02:32:01.429+01:002010-05-19T02:32:01.429+01:00Why shouldn't we expect God to build attack/de...<i>Why shouldn't we expect God to build attack/defense structures (ADS's?) into the "very good" creation which he knew would shortly fall under his curse?</i><br /><br />I don't know, Kurt; good question. <br /><br />Anyway I'm not looking for reasons to doubt God's Word, I think we simply notice certain structures in nature that appear to be designed for defense Coram Deohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03504564435400500996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-36889222652732091962010-05-19T01:54:04.957+01:002010-05-19T01:54:04.957+01:00John:
Re-read the question.
-TurretinFanJohn:<br /><br />Re-read the question.<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-74467102150060739142010-05-19T01:11:43.744+01:002010-05-19T01:11:43.744+01:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Rowbotham
fou...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Rowbotham<br /><br />founded the <br /><br />http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=48&Itemid=65<br /><br />which believes that <br />"Samuel Rowbotham's Flat Earth views were based largely on literal interpretation of Bible passages"<br /><br />I'm not sure if you want something more than John Lollardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15463317544726062051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-38976058901771748272010-05-19T00:31:24.583+01:002010-05-19T00:31:24.583+01:00Maybe you didn't understand my question, so le...Maybe you didn't understand my question, so let me rephrase it.<br /><br />Can you identify anyone who has said: "I think the flatness or the earth is theologically significant," or something to that effect.<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-76778645853823182022010-05-19T00:29:48.305+01:002010-05-19T00:29:48.305+01:00"Who exactly thinks that "flat earth&quo..."Who exactly thinks that "flat earth" is a primary doctrine of Scripture? What does this person or group think the theological significance is?"<br /><br />I would think people advocating for YEC would think a flat earth is a theologically significant doctrine.<br /><br />You seem to think that a 6,000-year-old universe is theologically significant, and you seem to think that John Lollardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15463317544726062051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-921892551474737982010-05-19T00:05:05.806+01:002010-05-19T00:05:05.806+01:00"Well, I guess that depends on who you ask.&q..."Well, I guess that depends on who you ask."<br /><br />Who exactly thinks that "flat earth" is a primary doctrine of Scripture? What does this person or group think the theological significance is?<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-87757218259629490452010-05-18T23:54:01.587+01:002010-05-18T23:54:01.587+01:00Hey TF,
"Creationism and particularly Creati...Hey TF,<br /><br />"Creationism and particularly Creation as an historical event is a primary doctrine of Christianity"<br /><br />I wholeheartedly affirm Creation. I don't affirm Creation as A historic event as I believe God remains active in His Creation, but I would say there are certainly historic evidences of God as Creator.<br /><br />""Flat earth" is not."John Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-10449032265200186512010-05-18T23:33:37.266+01:002010-05-18T23:33:37.266+01:00Creationism and particularly Creation as an histor...Creationism and particularly Creation as an historical event is a primary doctrine of Christianity. "Flat earth" is not. Reference point Geocentrism is hardly debatable (i.e. it's obviously true that Earth is our reference point for observing the Universe), and it is absurd to suggest that gravitational Geocentrism either is taught or was believed.Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-64354768992338837082010-05-18T23:23:56.991+01:002010-05-18T23:23:56.991+01:00natmllc, I did read the passage, and I tried to re...natmllc, I did read the passage, and I tried to read the Greek version I have, but I am just that ignorant of Greek. I can only assume that Peter is drawing a distinction between intimate personal knowledge of God and head knowledge about God?<br /><br />And I am continually amazed at God's ability to transform the mind.<br /><br />Love in Christ,<br />JLJohn Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-56328485536144370262010-05-18T23:13:46.891+01:002010-05-18T23:13:46.891+01:00By the way John,
did you look up the two Greek Wo...By the way John,<br /><br />did you look up the two Greek Words in 2 Peter one?<br /><br />I would like to know your thinking on that simply because that dump fisherman, Peter, after being indwelt with the Holy Spirit wrote such intelligent understanding of both science and metaphysics. I wouldn't of guessed God could so endow a thick head as he with such brilliance? You?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-67767436829900248342010-05-18T23:11:11.039+01:002010-05-18T23:11:11.039+01:00"I believe I am convinced that TF's posit..."I believe I am convinced that TF's position is the correct Biblical interpretation of YEC."<br /><br />Okay :)<br /><br />I think there is much to be said for such an interpretation.<br /><br />I was pondering not so long ago. A typical creationist claim is that the Fall caused most of nature to become corrupted. Christians normally point to carnivorous animals or parasites, but John Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-6372231262756171862010-05-18T23:04:43.436+01:002010-05-18T23:04:43.436+01:00JL,
Some time back at John Byl's blog "b...JL,<br /><br />Some time back at John Byl's blog "by logos" he did a discussion on YEC.<br /><br />Maybe TF was a part of it?<br /><br />In any event, I am a literal 6 days creation and the seventh They rested believer because it would be inconsistent of God to establish the lunar count based on the earth, planets and stars movement and then apply His legal judgment against Moses Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-67180232829864955222010-05-18T22:35:22.678+01:002010-05-18T22:35:22.678+01:00JL
if I could be corrected, I believe it was the ...JL<br /><br />if I could be corrected, I believe it was the deformed mated with deformed which then mated with the next generation of deformed. Each generation started to come back to the normal form four generations back.<br /><br />I believe I am convinced that TF's position is the correct Biblical interpretation of YEC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-6590073202617860532010-05-18T20:34:40.905+01:002010-05-18T20:34:40.905+01:00TF,
"It's not a question of activity in ...TF,<br /><br />"It's not a question of activity in biology. It's a question of exegesis. YEC is what the text of Scripture says."<br /><br />I'm not sure that I disagree. The text of Scripture does speak to YEC. As to whether or not that is what the Scriptures teach, I'm in doubts, but I'm not going to argue with your exegesis.<br /><br />"It's not just John Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-92125894413710565332010-05-18T20:06:26.532+01:002010-05-18T20:06:26.532+01:00John Lollard,
It's not a question of activity...John Lollard,<br /><br />It's not a question of activity in biology. It's a question of exegesis. YEC is what the text of Scripture says.<br /><br />Your reason for rejecting it is the historical assertions of those who accept philosophical naturalism.<br /><br />That's where the 99.... % issue comes into play. It's not just that a theistic evolutionary view is a stretch, it&#Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-42505690404129584072010-05-18T19:52:13.748+01:002010-05-18T19:52:13.748+01:00natamllc,
Let me make sure I understand. The inj...natamllc,<br /><br />Let me make sure I understand. The injected frog mated in the general population and made deformed frogs. Were the deformed frogs mated within the general population, or within the deformed population?<br /><br />I don't know enough about frog biology to be able to comment much. I will say, given just this experiment, it seems like there are two explanations. One John Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-10332507786195140912010-05-18T19:19:16.930+01:002010-05-18T19:19:16.930+01:00JL
I appreciate your demeanor and tone in being r...JL<br /><br />I appreciate your demeanor and tone in being responsive! Thanks.<br /><br />What would you define this experiment to be? Genetic correction or evolution?<br /><br />I read this in some journal awhile back and thought to myself, here's an evolution definition refutation by the scientific method.<br /><br />In a lab, they took a frog and injected nuclear product into it. Then theyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-8828943308900934092010-05-18T19:04:45.314+01:002010-05-18T19:04:45.314+01:00natamllc,
"Why is that? Why not just enjoy G...natamllc,<br /><br />"Why is that? Why not just enjoy God's creation and get along with that instead of having to always argue from a position of strength/knowledge and a knowledge not nearly as relevant as knowledge?"<br /><br />I could not agree more. I don't think we necessarily need to know anything more than what we are told in Genesis. But I do think we need to explain John Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-63043925613257281112010-05-18T18:40:13.639+01:002010-05-18T18:40:13.639+01:00JL
interesting ideas there!
"....in order t...JL<br /><br />interesting ideas there!<br /><br />"....in order to explain the observed phenomena in astronomy, geology, paleontology, and biology....".<br /><br />With this sort of reasoning, I wonder if you are willing to go on record and debunk them Biblically?<br /><br />Afterall, when I read that quotation, I stop and go, another one of those lies of the serpent, you know, the one,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-82583629072099899802010-05-18T17:51:52.526+01:002010-05-18T17:51:52.526+01:00ppc,
"If the Bible is read before Darwin cam...ppc,<br /><br />"If the Bible is read before Darwin came along, 99.9999999% of believers would never assume anything but a young earth and a 6 day creation. "<br /><br />I think that's the point. 99.9999999% of believers aren't active in biology. YEC is very intuitive; the sky is blue like water, so God separated the waters and called one heaven. The sun and moon are overheadJohn Lollardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-46571161920846878922010-05-18T15:44:49.563+01:002010-05-18T15:44:49.563+01:00Having studied evolution from both sides (as an un...Having studied evolution from both sides (as an unbeleiver then later as a believer), and holding a B.A. in biology, evolution is far from proven...hence the word "evolutionary theory".<br /><br />If the Bible is read before Darwin came along, 99.9999999% of believers would never assume anything but a young earth and a 6 day creation. Only modern day, "please the world" Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11167129731973533304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-68086808773993807242010-05-18T14:29:37.871+01:002010-05-18T14:29:37.871+01:00CD,
Why shouldn't we expect God to build atta...CD,<br /><br />Why shouldn't we expect God to build attack/defense structures (ADS's?) into the "very good" creation which he knew would shortly fall under his curse? <br /><br />I think it's reasonable to assume that 1) some such features anticipate the Fall, 2) some such features had non-carnivorous purposes before the Fall, and that 3) the genetic potential for some such Kurt Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17922190564522510470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-15935775940147428812010-05-18T12:31:52.608+01:002010-05-18T12:31:52.608+01:00I enjoyed C.S. Lewis fiction, but I'm not a fa...I enjoyed C.S. Lewis fiction, but I'm not a fan of his theology.<br /><br />We're not told to what extent the fall brought changes in the animal kingdom. Some folks at places like Answers in Genesis seem pretty sure that there were radical changes to animal physiology. I don't know. The Bible doesn't tell us, as far as I can see.Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21597890.post-7750528633760926332010-05-18T05:45:21.954+01:002010-05-18T05:45:21.954+01:00TF,
I raised this question in a prior thread, bu...TF, <br /><br />I raised this question <a href="http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2010/04/quick-thoughts-on-general-love-of-god.html?showComment=1271646456718#c5693056733463853306" rel="nofollow">in a prior thread</a>, but what are your thoughts so-called attack/defense structures observed in present day animals?<br /><br />In Christ,<br />CDCoram Deohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03504564435400500996noreply@blogger.com