Wayne Grudem: Creation in Scripture
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лип 2018
- Author and Professor Wayne Grudem dives into scripture's description of Creation. From the event "Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique," hosted by Biola University.
Excellent presentation. Thanks Wayne Grudem!
Excellent presentation, either it's all God's Word or none of it is. As we see the entire package of truth we can stand in awe of the truth , and can also be amazed at God's hand in the truth of " holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit". Men handpicked by God to speak what He would have them speak. God's Word spoken by men orchestrated by God Himself producing an unbroken chain of truth.
@Folk Aart He didn't need to. Creation itself testifies of God.
Really enjoyed this clear and direct teaching.
When we think about it though, really all humanity starts from Noah and his sons and their wives. Everything else was wiped out in the flood.
Brilliant presentation, thanks Dr. Grudem.
This presentation is about scripture. Years ago when I thought evolution was science, I would have taken it with a grain of salt. But now that I've investigated biology, especially proteins, I realize evolution is junk science so I appreciate the message presented here.
Exactly evolution isn't science so science and scripture don't conflict
Well..done wyane...
Excellent !
Great content, thank you.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to watch Professor Grudem because the camera vibrates sometimes and it give me headhacks. I presume the device was on a table or something like that.
Thanks Wayne please debate william lane craig on this topic
I would invite all Christians to take a deep breath and read Genesis 1-3 again with the following question in mind: Where MUST I draw the line between literal and figurative? Then consider the following: 1) In what sense is man made of dust? Literal or figurative? 2) In what sense did God form Adam? Literally with hands as the word suggests, or perhaps in some other figurative sense? 3) In what sense did God perform surgery on Adam's side? Did he literally incarnate into a surgeon? Were anesthetics required or was there yet no pain? If there was no pain, why was a deep sleep necessary? 4) Imagine God literally forming Eve. What does it look like? If you answer, "I don't know what it looked like, I just know God did it," that is precisely the point that Old-earth progressive creationists make. These questions I pose barely scratch the surface of verses that not even the staunchest literalist would claim must be taken literally.
Theistic Evolutionists : “Thanks for starting all of this God, but we can handle things from here... without you”!
God: “ I think you misunderstand the role that I play in all of this. I assure you, I am intimately involved in what I started”!
Theistic Evolutionists: “Sorry, but that doesn’t fit my strictly naturalistic narrative and besides... I get to decide what role you play in all of this”!
God: “I see! Well... I have you scheduled for an appointment to see Me. We can discuss this more at that time”!
Evening and morning, evening and morning, evening and morning. Nope no poetic repetition to be found.
@CALEB ALVAREZ - very well could be understood that way. I just don't get why we draw such a line in the sand on this.
@CALEB ALVAREZ - I would agree that believing in creation and a literal Adam and Eve is important - not necessarily for salvation but I see the slippery slope argument. As far as when it happened or how God chose to accomplish it, I see no importance to the argument whatsoever. Plenty of Christians that I respect that hold to Young Earth/Old Earth/Theistic Evolution. I see no reason to quarrel over who is correct, seems to only lead to trash talk, slander and separatism.
@CALEB ALVAREZ - I think that's a true statement but gets applied very selectively. I assume you would agree, that God wasn't literally walking in the cool of the garden because he was hot and needed the fresh air? Couldnt someone make the argument that this means God has physical legs and if you dont believe it you are mixing a lie with God's Word?
Disheartened that Dr. Grudem chose not to take a position on the age of the earth. I wonder why this is. The Bible gives us the genealogical record as he clearly states, so it’s not difficult to compute the rough age of the earth.
The genealogies are not for dating, they follow the generations. The days of creation cannot be taken as literal man-based 24 hour days. The bottom line is we just don't know, so why make an argument out of it?
Because it conflicts with a literal reading.
@@Daz19 how do you interpret “the spirit of God was hovering over the waters” literally? I hate the arguments about what is literal or not.
@CALEB ALVAREZ nothing had been created yet so what was the waters?
I’ve listened to his audio lectures on systematic theology. He actually says that at this point, he feels that the scientific evidence seems to be most compelling for Older Earth theory, although he says he can’t say that with certainty but it’s what he currently leans towards.
So many people try to be humble and diplomatic saying 'gee, these people are Christians but ..."
Personally, I don't buy it. How can you be a Christian and not believe God's Word? Was it not written by the Holy Spirit? Does it not say the Holy Spirit would teach us? I think when someone denies the veracity of the Scriptures, they are blaspheming the Holy Spirit. They are undermining Christianity to its core. They have rejected the God of the Bible. You can speak nice about people like Francis Collins if you want but I think we will not find that man when we get to Heaven. I think he is someone to whom Jesus will say, "I never knew you."
Wow so you’re putting yourself in the place of God now
@@l21n18 - How so? God speaks for Himself. We have God's Word.
We do have Gods word but we have to interpret it how it was supposed be understood, to say these people aren't Christians is ridiculous, in order to be saved there is one clear truth, Jesus is lord
@@johnygoodwin3441 - _"... interpret it how it was supposed be [sic] understood ..."_
Who decides _how it is supposed to be understood?_ And how do they decide? Unless God instructs us otherwise, like with Jesus' parables, we can only safely assume it is to be "interpreted" to say exactly what it says plainly. In the Revelation, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and some other places, we are told certain passages are "visions" or "dreams" and we can treat them as such. However, we have zero indication that anything in Genesis, except Jacob's or Joseph's dreams, is to be taken as anything other than actual simple history. The first sin of Man was to distort, reject, and disobey God's Word. If you deny Genesis, you are denying the Holy Spirit who is the Author of Scripture.
@@rubiks6 What we need to understand, especially in the western world, that the Bible was written for us, but not to us, it is bound by culture to an extent and it's our job as honest truth seekers to find out the context as much as is possible, we can't just go to the ancient text and read it with a 21st century lens, I'm not saying that we can't understand it but we have to do our due diligence.
What can't be denied is that the Bible has many different genres, wisdom, poetry, historical narrative, apocalyptic etc, it's common sense to see that it's not intended to all be read in the same way, just as we recognise different genres in our time and read them accordingly.
Cain got wives from the gentiles around them,gentiles(Neanderthals) were created with the animals,Adam and Eve is the first humans created after the gentiles and animals, the gentiles are people but there is a little difference,gentiles don't have God's breath in them,thats why when we become Christians we must be baptized in water that God sends his spirit upon us,for the hebrews(Adams seed) they must keep the circumcision,but we all have to keep the laws,most of all trust your CREATORS words,this man is on the right trail,good one
Interesting theory, but really all humans today would come from Noah and his sons and their wives. Everyone else was wiped out in the flood.
@@preoccupied4800 yes but Gods chosen people still gave birth to gentiles after the flood,that's how the giants were revived after the floods
John Walton.....
He quotes from John Walton in the video
Genuinely funny
Problematic understanding by Grudem and the relatively new Christian views. The speaker misses the basic premise of a 'Program' - namely the 'seed' factor: "Let the earth put forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit after its kind, wherein is the seed thereof" [Gen 1/11]. Nor is Adam a pronoun in chapter 1, but a noun, and the first recorded dual-gender, speech-endowed human ['Man and woman created He them']. No alternative recorded speech native exists and no earlier name than Adam & Eve exists. Also wrong about 'RIB' which in Hebrew is 'SIDE'. So respectfully....Boom!
Yes, actually creation is avolution.
@Ναζωραῖος that's the problem, most people think that the bible is written , so as to make it sense ofit in our time. But does not . The revelation is even mostly past. The only part of the revelation that is pertinent to our time is chapter 9,v 14, to 19. And the sixth angel of revelation. The same story is written several times over, in chapter 6, and chapter 9, and chapter 16, and again in chapter 18v. Everytime he wrote about the sixth angel is the same events. And as far as you can tell it's a nuclear or automic war. And it's the next war. After that war there will be radiation poisoning everywhere.
Darwin would disagree with your statement.
@@chromeshouts5706 don't care what Darwin thinks, as he was wrong in a lot his history, and other things. Things change, and as we learn, you will recognize that.
@@gerardmiller7364 so we steal Darwin's original idea and add God to it and call Darwin a fool?
@@chromeshouts5706 not exactly, Darwin was a genius in his time. However you wouldn't drive a horse and buggy. Now just as things change. And you and I have to chart our own course, just he did.
So the age of the Earth.....Crickets.
Well, we almost have the same name.
@@dagwould Ha! I love it. Nice to meet you Dagwould!
He specifically said at the beginning, it is an issue he is not going to touch on. Get over it.
@@rubiks6 Nah, I'd rather point out why he cherry picks and expose it.
Biola doubling down on fundamentalism, I see.
Be blessed by it brotha. Time has tested the theory of unguided evolution and it has been weighed and found wanting. The truth is you can take God at His word. The creation of the universe down to life itself was supernatural, there was a world wide flood that one family survived, the battle of good and evil is real and most importantly Christ will reign. See with the freedom to trust The Bible in Genesis, you can trust it in Revelation. As well as all His beautiful promises to us within it.
TreeTrunksgp
more of a curse than a blessing.
Only objective in your subjective mind.
It looks like you came here to troll, not have a discussion, so have a great day.
you make it sound like that's a problem. Or was this a statement of agreement?
Creationism in all it's forms, is nothing more than a fairy tale.
What’s all it’s forms?
@@l21n18 Old Earth Creationism
Young Earth Creatioism
Intelligent Design
Theistic Evolution.
Creation Science.
@@walkergarya that’s not creationism, and calling something a fairytale to me sounds like you’re just interested in trolling random videos. Not in any stilts engagement with anybody
@@l21n18 I get my science from scientists, not from creationist trolls.
@@walkergarya nope and I’m not a creationist either.