Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Not comprehending the majesty of God

I watched the debate last night between Ken Ham (answers in Genesis) and Bill Nye (science guy)..

It was very sad to watch. 

Neither man comprehends the fullness of God's Majesty.  Mr Nye is just blinded by atheism and the necessity to reason everything thru.  Mr Ham while he has great faith, he is trying to pound a square peg in a round hole.  He believes the Bible, but he doesn't seem to have comprehended it fully.  In a sad way he uses reason to try to fathom the supernatural. 

If my fingers worked well, I would outline my understanding of how this all comes down.  Right now I'm typing a few short of a full deck.    Here's reality, if you would understand creation in it's fullness and how it happened, you have to understand the book of Revelation.  Genesis and Revelation are bookends. 

Everything in Genesis is true, it just must be understood in light of Revelation.  Yet, time is a gift.  Eternity is the norm.  God did indeed create it all.  The earth is as old as it is... and the universe is indeed billions of years old.  IF we get our hands around the Majesty of God.. this all makes sense thru the eyes of faith.  Yet...  to reason.. it's incomprehensible.

Neither faith nor reason was on display last night.


Vincenzo said...

This got me thinking about the Flood. Atheists say there's no geological evidence and YEC's claim there is. Is it possible that the Flood wasn't literal but a global cataclysm (meteor strikes, tectonic upheavals), or that maybe the pre-Flood people destroyed themselves through endless war?

Fallout said...

I did not watch the debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye because there was no one to root for...they are both wrong. A few years ago I watched a series of debates put on by John Ankerberg about a the age of the earth and other questions. The debate had Ken Ham with anther person on one side and Hugh Ross and another person on the other side. If you are interested in the topic I found the links here at “The Reasons To Believe” at the bottom of the page:

The translation problem with “was” has created confusion.

Genesis 1:2 with the Strong's reference numbers:
Gen 1:2 And the earthH776 wasH1961 without form,H8414 and void;H922 and darknessH2822 was uponH5921 the faceH6440 of the deep.H8415 And the SpiritH7307 of GodH430 movedH7363 uponH5921 the faceH6440 of the waters.H4325
The Strong's Concordance for the word, “was” references the Hebrew word “hayah”, #H1961...
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary)
Verse 1, In the beginning God created.
Verse 2, The creation of God “became” or “came to pass” without form, not “was”.
God does not create things without form:
Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
In the above verse where it says “not in vain”, is the Hebrew word “tuhu” H8414. The same word used as “without form” H8414 in Genesis 1:2.
The time between Genesis verse 1 and 2 is unknown but could be billions of years. (That would be the first earth age. We are now in the second. The third will be the eternity.)
Between verses 1 and 2 was the overthrow (katabole) of Satan.
Peter explains that the ancient earth was destroyed by water...this is not Noah's flood.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.