Is the Age of the Earth a Hill to Die On? (Gavin Ortlund)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- In this episode, Gavin Ortlund discusses the idea of theological triage and how questions about creation fit into that.
Gavin Ortlund runs the popular UA-cam channel "Truth Unites" and is the author of 'Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage' from Crossway. www.crossway.o...
❖ Read the full transcript of this episode. www.crossway.o...
❖ Contents:
01:10 - An Angst That Led to Compassion
09:30 - What Is Theological Triage?
14:14 - Can the Bible Be Interpreted Literally?
18:29 - How Important Is Creation Ex Nihilo?
20:53 - Old Earth vs. Young Earth
28:07 - Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?
30:09 - What about Evolution?
31:59 - Was There Death before the Fall?
35:53 - Are We Focusing on the Wrong Things?
39:46 - The Pursuit of Peace for the Sake of the Gospel
❖ Listen to “How Should Christians Navigate Political Disagreements among Friends?” with Jonathan Leeman:
Apple Podcasts | podcasts.apple...
Spotify | open.spotify.c...
UA-cam | • How Should Christians ...
❖ Complete this survey for a free audiobook by Kevin DeYoung!
mailchi.mp/cro...
If you enjoyed this episode be sure to leave us a review, which helps us spread the word about the show!
❖ For more resources from Crossway, check our website: www.crossway.org/
❖ Follow us on social media to stay up to date:
Instagram: / crosswaybooks
Facebook: www.facebook.c...
Twitter: / crossway
Threads: www.threads.ne...
MB01BR4EZWHDBGL
If someone leaves the faith over an answer to a question they don't like or a disagreement It's likely they never had a strong foundation to begin with.
I can see the attraction of a triage approach to the age of the earth. But it seems to me that the unintended consequence of this approach is actually to compromise our witness.
I feel desperately sad that so many people outside the church look at the created world - and give the credit to evolution, instead of giving the glory to God.
The created world is supposed to point people to the creator - so that they are ‘without excuse’. Except - evolution does give them an excuse now.
And instead of the church asserting confidently that God created everything, and deserves all the glory for it, we shy away from controversy and tell ourselves it’s not an issue worth causing disunity over.
Surely God can’t be happy that he is not receiving the glory due to him?
Whilst unity is a really important witness, is it more important than the witness we demonstrate in glorifying God for his creation?
I’d love to hear Gavin’s response regarding this. Does evolution give God the glory - or does it rob God of his glory? And does it matter?
Only after the flood when it was pushed up…
The whole young earth creationism was never an issue for me.
As far as i'm concerned, it was NEVER necessary to take the creative days literally.
Even if we don't take into consideration the text that says A thousand years is as one day to God, the Hebrew term used for day in the OT (yom) Can signify a period of time of unspecified duration.
It was foolish to go with the English translation of the word day when the original manuscript was written in ancient Hebrew. What matters is there a definition of the word, not ours.
What else in the Bible shouldn't be taken literally? We just cherry pick now? Just do what you like - the resurrection wasn't literal?
@rach9466
Depends. What's YOUR hermeneutic??
Passages meant to be literal are easy to identify. Passages that are symbolic are usually written in hyperbolic language.
If something is stated that can't be true because it doesn't make sense (like wisdom being personified as a woman) the passage MUST be Symbolism.
@rach9466
It's weird That you completely missed what I said about the language of the original Hebrew. How on earth did you just breeze right past that???
@@MultipleGrievance you don’t have to yell lol.. yom is used in a context that describes consecutive instances, and a regular period of day/night, which would be a 24hr period. I suppose you can say the days are metaphor for many years or whatever but it’s not necessarily the most logical or concise reasoning.