First off- Thanks, Rachel and Rene for the Gap theory/alternate explanation links. I am always glad to find more info on that construct! Rene, I’d love to compare notes on this. I, too, was helped greatly when I first began to HS by the ‘kjv.bible.org’ website.
Second, Laurie and the other ladies who exhibited restraint in an often volatile area, thank you..
Having said that, I need to put in my two cents: Doug, what you say just isn’t so.
There is not just ‘one’ theory of origins, there are many- Not because God is not True, [John 17:17!] BUT because the ‘theories of origins’ are not God’s, but man’s THEORIES. That being said, I am not an ‘evolutionist.’ Hardly.
The PCA (a large conservative Presbyterian body) allows for different approaches- you can read this report of theirs, here:
http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html
Indeed, this POV is not new, but old.
“It is certainly not necessary to think that the six days spoken of in that first chapter of the Bible are intended to be six days of twenty four hours each. We may think of them rather as very long periods of time.” ~ J. Gresham Machen
(Theologian, founder of Westminster Theological Seminary – and CLEARLY not a ‘modernist’ – he was kicked out of the Presbyterian Church of his day, for being too ‘fundamentalist’ – cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist-Modernist_Controversy )
“The simple fact is that day in Hebrew (just as in English) is used in three separate senses: to mean (1) twenty-four hours, (2) the period of light during the twenty-four hours, and (3) an indeterminate period of time. Therefore, we must leave open the exact length of time indicated by day in Genesis.” ~ Francis Schaeffer
Having quoted these things as preamble, Doug – Such blanket statements as this
‘There really is nothing there to suggest anything other than a creation in six literal 24-hour days, back-to-back, no gaps (good article on the gap theory), no gazillions of years.’
are untenable, (unless you are looking at only the last 50 years, that is- or only consider Ken Ham and the ICR/AIG to be the a sort of 7/24 latter-day ‘pontifical’ source from which you garner your views; which is either a very un-protestant POV, (since when did one group of ‘self-proclaimed experts’ determine ‘faith and morals’ on a non-religious POV, other than the Pope!?) or a rather myopic view of Life; taking all truth from only a very short span of time, within the full history of God’s revelation and His Church.
Ken Ham’s own personal animus against ANYONE that disagrees with him is well-known; possibly because, (if he were being honest) he would allow/note that many, many scientists throughout history have been Old-Earth Creationists (OEC’s). Here’s just one page to corroborate that fact: http://www.geocities.com/vr_junkie/NotableOldEarthCreatinists.htm
Sorry to be so adamant about this, Doug, but I am trying to teach my children TRUTH – and that is one of the reasons I am SOO GLAD to have found this website- not only am I really a CM fan, but that the first time on here, I find THIS discussion (WOW), and learn something “I” didn’t know- (WOWOW) this is TRULY exciting!
And I really get tanked when someone says ‘This POV only is true- the rest are heretics.’ As a former RC, and now a traditionalist Anglican/Orthodox clergyman, I have learned as I get older to be less vocal about what I ‘really know,’ (there’s always someone wiser than I) and to not have as combative a spirit as I once did, (which may seem odd, ladies, as this is my first post on this forum… so imagine how I USED to be! LOL) especially when calling someone a ‘heretic;’ when godly men and women have held that ‘other’ POV long before I was born, and were not ‘excommunicated’ by their version of the Pontifical Commission… or the Sanhedrin.
So, when I hear someone saying,
‘But if her [Miss Mason’s] ideas conflict with the Bible (not implying they do or don’t), then I firmly place my faith in God, not Charlotte. She was only human like the rest of us…’
YOU ARE implying that very thing! Let’s be honest, shall we, and no dissembling. This is setting up straw men to knock down, that aren’t part of the area being discussed. Charlotte (God bless her…literally!) was an Anglican, and an English[wo]man, both of whom tried to stem the tide of evil in their days, (Darwin and Huxley) at the height of the greatest Evangelical Protestant establishment known to man- the C of E. What makes we ‘post-moderns’ (who foolishly listen to men who say, ‘You don’t polish brass on a sinking ship’ ) think we can do, in less than fifty years, what they worked for over 1800 to do!
Having said that, (and I am sure to be bounced for it, on this, my first post) I am not ‘against’ those who are ICR7/24 types; I have used ‘Creationist’ materials with my two kids, whom I homeschool. (‘Considering God’s Creation’ is just lovely) I just ordered (in fact) 3 volumes from the “God’s Design for Life” series by the local ‘bookpeddler,’ to complement, and to give some area of philosophical foundation on which my children can look at future science courses ( and, also cuz they were on sale!!). But I will not teach them as ‘Gospel Truth’ that which is not, or is not the ONLY way to look at it.
But I also want to make clear to my children (and to my parishioners) that, while it (ICR, 7/24) may be a ‘safe’ view in light of atheist evolutionary thought, it may not also, thereby, be the most ‘scientific’ POV. Better to note that Evolutionists are ultimately RELIGIOUS in their false faith, (then one is on an equal playing field) rather than try and assume they are ‘scientific,’ and we religiously-minded people, who trust in the God of All Creation, (precisely because we are humble enough to say that God is God, and we are not… unlike the evolutionists!) are not being ‘scientific’ thereby. That, I think, is the greatest error we can make; for, in doing so, we give the Evolutionists credence where they ultimately have none. [Ps. 14:1] But to battle with them, (thinking ourselves wise…) when we deny all forms of scientific measuring (archeology, carbon-dating, fossil evidence, etc.) makes us look fools- and not the kind God approves of!
Even Stein’s ‘Expelled’ was arguing for ID, not ‘7/24ism.’ We need a less insular vision, not a less faithful one. And to confuse the two, is a fearful thing to do…