Kent Hovind

[Guest]

TK, gtsy, hny,

You weren't posting to me but, if i may:

i am yet undecided on the issue; quite frankly i dont really care one way or the other because i dont think it matters at all in the way we shoud live as christians. to me, it's just a fun thing to talk about. and it's a real mystery, to me at least.

Whether it's Hovind, Ross, me, you, or any other Christian; there is an interplay of science and hermeneutics. Whatever interpretation one may arrive at depends, at least in part, on one's presuppositions. I try to be skeptical about what I or anyone else brings to the text and to discard these as best I can. In other words, my goal is objectivity.

The closest description I could give of my view on Creation would go something like:
"God Definately Made Everything A Long Time Ago:
But Exactly When, How, and Where He Did It, I Don't Know-Creationist"
(no pun intended, actually, if this sounds funny).
People like Ross, Hovind, and others are presenting possibilities, imo. In other words, I don't think anyone has Creation "Down To a T". The Creationist debates remind me of Calvinist controversies...(all these folks thinking they have The Inside-View of the Mind of God). To me, any time science is involved, anyone could be wrong. Anyone could be right....
Sorry if I'm getting off-topic,
Rick

[Guest]

TK and Rick,

Through my reading of the bible and study of the evidence, I am firmly convinced of a young earth, and a literal six-day creation. However, I could be wrong. Either way, I wish you both the best as you decide on the issue for yourself.

Robin

[Guest]

Robin,

Thanks.

We know "God is The Creator" is believed by every Christian. As I listen to lectures and debates, and read about the various views on the details of the issue; I don't know.... (I might need to get a Ph.D. in Physics first to be able to understand what these guys are (even) talking about)!

"God is The Creator" is what I believe. If there's more details to it than that I trust I will find out....
Thanks again, Robin,
Rick

[Guest]

i admit that i am perhaps too hung up on wondering "how" God did it. my wife says this is one of my biggest faults (not that she is one to point out very many). i am sure she is right.

if He did it in 6 days a few thousand years ago, i am sure i will be surprised when i find out for sure. and if he did it several billion years ago in steps that took ages, i will likely be surprised as well, simply because i am truly torn between the two possibilities.


TK

[Guest]

TK,

As I'm studying up on all of the different views that are out there and the variations within each Camp; it seems to me folks are doing a bit of speculation. I mean, in all of the views & their 'sub-views' there are places where I question their exegesis. You know, reading something into a verse (or word(s)) to 'make things fit'. Hovind does it, Ross does it, they all do it, imo.

It doesn't matter to me if God took 6 milliseconds, 6 days or 6 gazillion years. For Hovind it has to be 6 (literal) days...or as he put it, "...a God that would have to use a Big Bang and billons of years to get us here is a retarded God...". Mmmmkay. I don't follow his reasoning but if he has to believe what he does to keep from believing in a "retarded God", that's what he's gotta do.

TK, if you only have 2 possibilites maybe you could try out My View (?). If you just read what it is...everything is defined.
Rick

[Guest]

Though I only wanted to discuss Hovind's beliefs in this thread, I did a google search on his present legal status and found this:

mPower Ministries
Letter from Kent Hovind
23 November 2006

In this letter Hovind acknowledges his sin (he was found guilty of tax evasion, if this is what he is referring to) and talks about several other things. I hope this letter is as genuine as it seems to be.
Rick

[_anothersteve]

Hi Rick, I just listened to the debate.

I don’t know Dr. Hovind but may I offer my thoughts….

I think initially Dr. Hovind was thrown off by the answer that Dr. Ross had just given. He apparently wasn’t aware that Dr. Ross believed that the “Big Bang” was divinely designed and not just a random occurrence. Dr Hovind didn’t seem to know how to respond and got off on a tangent and then ended up making the comment..

When the moderator challenged him, he didn’t seem to be retracting or denying what he said but rather clarifying it (in other words, I don’t think he was lying). If I were to paraphrase his comments I’d put it like this “I didn’t say I’d question your love for the Lord if you disagree with me but if you disagree with the plain meaning of scripture.”

Rick, I think from his point of view, it’s hard for him to understand how someone can say they love God and not follow what, in his mind, is God’s word. I think he may feel it’s disrespectful not to take God “at His word”. I disagree with Dr. Hovind’s assessment but I do respect his, apparent, desire to take God’s word seriously. I also think it’s good, in a way, that he expressed his true feelings….I appreciate honest dialogue with people, I find you can get further along when you’re honest. I don’t see this as an occasion for Dr. Ross or any of us to be offended, but rather an opportunity to understand and address Dr. Hovind's concerns.

Am I saying that Dr. Hovind’s comments were appropriate? No. We all have growing to do!

Eph 4:2 “… with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love”

God Bless you brother,

Steve

[_anothersteve]

duplicate post

[Guest]

I just wanted to point out a couple of areas where I thing Hugh Ross departs from biblical teaching.

1. Hugh Ross believes Life existed for billions of years on earth before Adam and Eve were created. Genesis 1:24-31 says that God created the living creatures and Man on the same day.

2. Hugh teaches a local flood and not a global flood. His point would be impossible to teach from scripture and difficult to teach from a scientific point of view as well.


Hello Roblaine, If the OEC view is correct then each creation day could have been billions of years each and since God created things in increasing complexity (note women are created last) therefore life could have existed billions of years before man yet be created on the same day-age.
The local flood is also a biblical view. I just got a book by Ralph Woodrow called "Noah's Flood, Joshus's Long Day, and Lucifer's Fall, what really happened?" Woodrow has the local flood view partly because the word translated as world "erets" also means land.

[Guest]

AnotherSteve,

I hear what you're saying. I've lost my cool in debates and said the wrong thing before. There have been times I didn't apologize for using Ad Hominem. I also understand what you mean by how Hovind sees Creation, etc. Hovind is a Fundamentalist; Ross is a Conservative: these 2 camps debate about other stuff too, and so on....
Rick