27

If it is a scientific certainty that a tree create one and only one ring per year, then this would be problematic. However, as you can read on Wikipedia, this is not always the case: Alternating poor and favorable conditions, such as mid summer droughts, can result in several rings forming in a given year. Wikipedia So, it would only take conditions ...


20

An extremely simple argument for this sense is to consider the following two questions: Q1. Does the epistle of Romans assume and rely on an essentially literal* interpretation of the fall of man (cf. Genesis 1-3)? Q2. How foundational is the epistle of Romans to a Christian understanding of the gospel? It may be possible to argue these points to a ...


14

Based on the wording of your question, I assume you want a literalist/young earth creationist perspective. This isn't the only perspective in Christianity. Plenty believe in evolution, or one form of Old Earth Creationism or another. The last portion of this answer, on particular, will likely be jumped on by the OEC and Evolutionist crowds, as it's ...


10

Disclaimer - I'm not saying that you have to be a fundamentalist to be a Christian. I'm simply explaining the Fundamentalist perspective on this issue. it's likely to offend someone. That's not my intent. Biblical Literalism, from a Fundamentalist perspective dies not mean hyper-literalism. Instead, we tend toward historical-grammatical method of ...


7

The Issue is the Authority of Scripture and How We Should Read It Not all YEC think alike, but some of the most compelling arguments I've heard regarding this have to do with why it's desirable to someone to make the account metaphorical. If one is just trying to make the Biblical account harmonize with the latest naturalistic theories concerning the age of ...


6

Assuming your date for creation and delta to the flood are correct, one way is to say the tree was not uprooted or killed by the flood. Perhaps it went dormant, as in winter. (If that fails, there's always supernatural preservation.) After all, the dove brought back the olive branch as the sign that things were growing again shortly after the flood. So ...


6

The historical answer to this question has been that Noah's three sons - Shem, Ham, and Japeth - represent the three major races - the Whites, the Blacks, and the Asians. Here, for example, is a reference showing this understanding. Hal Lindsay's Late Great Planet Earth also made reference to this common myth that Noah's son's were the progenitors of the ...


6

The doctrine of biblical inerrancy is very recent in Christian history First, let's put biblical inerrancy into perspective. Two centuries or so ago, and for all of Christian history before that, not a single Christian church, denomination, or preacher held that the Bible is inerrant. The very idea of biblical inerrancy had never even occurred to anyone. ...


5

Here's one answer (emphasis added): In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Professor William Henry Green and theologian Benjamin B. Warfield noted gaps and omissions in the Genesis genealogies. This suggested the creation was conceivably older than the 6,000-year timeframe proposed by Ussher and Lightfoot. Today many Bible scholars believe the ...


5

"God is not controlled by laws of science" I don't know whether you can share this idea with me or not. The truth is, science cannot explain everything. Simple things like dreams, thoughts, feelings and emotions cannot be explained by science. Science can only understand the things that human can see, touch, feel and hear. I don't think the law of science as ...


5

In the ACC (Anglican Catholic Church,) Church tradition (the doctrine of the first seven Ecumenical Councils)is supported by scripture when scripture is properly interpreted by the Fathers (2nd - 6th. cents.) Passages in the text that appear, when taken literally, to contradict one another, are resolved through mystical interpretation (communion with the ...


4

People have many genetic attributes. Of course genes are passed on to your children. It's a well-understood biological phenomenon that small populations can lose material from the gene pool. For example: Suppose we have a genetic trait that has possibilities, called "alleles", big-A and small-a. We have two people who each have both alleles, that is, they ...


4

To take the Bible literally is to take the verses which are plain in meaning to you, with the aid of a dictionary if need be, and only those verses. It's extra-biblical teaching that is all the trouble, in my Fundamentalist opinion, not the figurative speech in the Bible. It's true that some scripture is hard to be understood, the scriptures even say that. ...


4

It depends on the literalist. A Young Earth Creationist would directly challenge the scientific method used to define the speed of light and therefore the light year. Other literalists might shrug and say who can know the mind of God. (Romans 11:34) Also, when arguing the age of the universe old/young universe proponents often argue that it is a cumulative ...


3

According to Tom Pickett on this site: http://www.ldolphin.org/pickett.html Although it is difficult to obtain an actual value of world population at the time of the flood, 5 to 17 billion people would appear to be reasonable populations, with an average of around 10 billion. The site shows the assumptions and formula used for calculation. Inherent in ...


3

Here is some fairly recent data by those not friendly to creationism. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publid.htm It looks like those who believe in creationism are 36%. While those who do not believe in evolution are 29%. It is interesting to note that while falling, the percent change over the generations is not as steep as one might suspect. There ...


3

For individual Lutherans, it varies. For what the Lutheran Church teaches - the majority teach a literal interpretation. There are likely a few more "liberal" Lutheran Churches and possibly synods that reject a literal account, but I have yet to find any. When you ask "Do Lutherans believe", you're asking something that can't truly be answered any other ...


2

We find in Acts: Acts 2:2-4 (ESV) "And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave ...


2

a slippery slope of interpreting the Bible in a way that favors one's own opinion. The first thing is to know how to avoid this slippery slope. A Christian who does not believe in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible could say that someone who does believe in biblical inerrancy (and therefore interprets everything in the Bible literally) is imposing his or ...


2

Rather than attempting an exhaustive list of denominational stances on the historicity of flood narrative, I'm going to suggest that the Flood itself is less of an issue than how one reads the Bible. In the question What does it mean to read the bible literally, I suggested that the primary differentiator between a liberal reader and a conservative one is ...


2

According to this article, mankind is nearing its 33rd doubling. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27503685?seq=1 If you divide The 1,656 years from the creation to the flood by 33, you get 50 years per doubling. That means that if the pre-flood world population doubled twice per century, and no die-off due to famine, war or disease occurred, then the ...


2

OP asks: Do Catholics believe everything in the bible is true as written? <meme>You keep using that word, "true". It does not mean what you think it means.</meme> The short answer is "Yes, and not quite", if by "true" is intended a flatly literalistic understanding of everything written in the Bible. (On the problem of "literalism", not ...


2

St. Thomas Aquinas writes in Summa Theologica I q. 1 a. 10 ("Whether in Holy Scripture a word may have several senses?"): all the senses [of Holy Scriptures]* are founded on one—the literal *Which are (ibid. arg. 1): "historical or literal, allegorical, tropological or moral, and anagogical" If the foundation of all the other senses are falsities (lies),...


2

We are only as good as our nature The reason we have sinful inclinations, suffering etc. to begin with is due to our nature as fallen human beings. We are fallen and not 'perfect' human beings because Adam was created specially; but we are born from him, and are therefore according to his nature as we recieve it. Since the Fall corrupted human nature, it was ...


2

Jesus describes a 'great gulf' when he revealed something of the deceased condition of the rich man, separated by great distance from Lazarus, the beggar who once was left, daily, at his gate, who received nothing from him during life. In the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, in 14:10-11, John reports the vision concerning the lake of fire : ... he ...


2

This is likely a non-answer answer, but we should start with the title of the book, "4 Views on Hell." If one thing is clear it is that the scripture is not clear on exactly what Hell is like. Hence the reason why - after 2000 years of study and debate - that we can't agree. You can find an article on Matthew's use of "outer darkness" ...


1

No, I don't think the Doctrine of the Trinity has ever been explained as a natural phenomenon after reading the Bible. There are places where all three Persons of the Trinity are mentioned together, like the great commission Go therefore, Baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Jesus and there's other places where Our ...


1

The best verse that mentions the Trinity is Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 28:19, NIV) The best verse for the oneness of the Father and Son is I and the Father are one. (John 10:30, NIV) Another verse which attests that God is one. "The ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible