Dr. Hugh Ross is a bit atypical of other creationists, having earned impressive degrees in astronomy and astrophysics at legitimate universities such as the University of Toronto and CalTech. He's a bit reviled among other creationists, too, because he believes that the Genesis account of creation is metaphorical and not literal, and that the Earth is far older than the 6000 or so years to which young earthers like Kent Hovind subscribe. Like those other creationists, though, Ross travels the country advocating the teaching of creationism within science classes. Ross and the Christian ministerial organization he founded adhere to The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics as promulgated by the International Council of Biblical Inerrancy which states, in part: "We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history, or anything else... We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it." But science is the scientific process: problem, experimentation, observation, analysis, and then theorization. True science and true scientists do not begin with a conclusion, as Ross and other creationists do, and to which they've sworn an oath. What Ross does is called "shoehorning": he twists words and meanings to conclusions he's already reached and from which he cannot be swayed. I give you the following as an example. From Ross's "Reasons to Believe" website we find his quote: "The Bible’s prophets and apostles stated explicitly and repeatedly the two most fundamental properties of the big bang, a transcendent cosmic beginning a finite time period ago and a universe undergoing a general, continual expansion." In support of that contention, Mr. Ross lists the verses below (the best he could find, by the way). Ross contends that "stretched" and "stretches" in these verses are explicit proof that "the Bible taught it first." Mr. Ross, you see, would hate to waste all that expensive astronomical training of his, but can't emotionally surrender his Jesus attachment, either. So, he's forced to contend that "stretch" means "expand", even when there was a separate Hebrew word for the latter. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself whether something that has been stretched out as a tent connotes something that is perpetually expanding. I'll leave it to you, also, to decide whether these verses are "explicit" statements of a universe undergoing continual expansion. As for myself, I contend that if the Bible truly wanted to teach us a constantly expanding universe we would have been given TRUE explicitness, in the form of something like "the universe is constantly expanding." I also contend that Hugh Ross is willfully dishonest, as are other creationists. Job 9:8 He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. Psalm 104:2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain. Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. Isaiah 42:5 This is what God the LORD says-- he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it: Isaiah 44:24 "This is what the LORD says-- your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself, Isaiah 45:12 It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts. Isaiah 48:13 My own hand laid the foundations of the earth, and my right hand spread out the heavens; when I summon them, they all stand up together. Isaiah 51:13 that you forget the LORD your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth, that you live in constant terror every day because of the wrath of the oppressor, who is bent on destruction? For where is the wrath of the oppressor? Jeremiah 10:12 But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Jeremiah 51:15 "He made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. Zechariah 12:1 This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him, declares:
Looks like the Ohio recount debate has fizzled in the Senate, the House will surely follow. But, hey, you've got Barbara Boxer on your side. I guess that's worth something. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
maybe, but i think that some are so brainwashed that they have no choice but to spout what they have been told, and would never even admit to themselves that they are dishonest. anyways, i think it is hard to know. they crazy vs lying question is one i often wonder about. maybe some of both. my opinion is that most christians are 75% brainwashed, 20% insane and 5% dishonest.
I don't have any facts to back up what I believe even though I do believe in creation. However, I don't dismiss the big bang and evolution as a way that it could've happened. It's probably most likely that it happened that way. I also don't think that believing in creation is essential for salvation it's just a very minor part of everything. Who cares if God created everything in 6 days or if the big bang and evolution did anything. I also don't think that Creationism should be taught in schools because there is no scientific proof to back it up like there is for evolution. Creationism should be kept to private schools and church, public schools shouldn't be allowed to teach it.
to address the comment in my rep point window: "brainwashed, insane, dishonest....for not agreeing with you? lol" yes. i am sure you woulod say that muslims are brainwashed, wouldnt you? or maybe i am? why else wouldnt i see it your way? that is not a personal attack on christians, it is just my opinion on why they think the way they do. i cant explain it any other way. i try. and since i know they are not stupid, how else can i understand it?
Thanks for clearing that up. I really was dying to know. In case you didn't figure it out on your own, I hit you with the mighty "red dot" in retaliation for yours. The whole red dot system is pretty stupid in my opinion, so the only time I use it is in response to yours. Even though there are many posts on here I disagree with, there are only a few I disagree with enough to challenge, and when I do I attempt to do so by replying within the thread. As for the "relevance" of my previous post, it was only to poke a little good-natured fun at Rex over a news report I had just seen. No harm intended, just teasing him, and he is more than welcome to return the favor at any time. I don't see where that is any more irrelevant than many of your rants in other threads. But, I will sleep better knowing there is someone out there patrolling TigerForums, making sure every post is in it's proper place. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. I realize message board are important because they allow people to vent their frustration and intolerance when they are unable or afraid to do so in a public setting. Carry on, martin. But try to catch a (N)(J)(M)ets replay and relax a little.
Hugh Ross may be a scientist, but his theories on the formation of the universe are flawed as have been every other creation theory, whether biblical or scientific. They are erroneous conclusions based on a sample size of one. We cannot draw any conclusions about the causes of a phenomenon until we have observed many results of the same type. We can conclude that a fish can swim only on the basis of many observations of fish swimming in the past. Since we can observe only one universe, it is impossible to draw any conclusions about what sort of thing may have caused it.
Exactly Red. Science is what we know, what we can test, and what we can reproduce. Macro-evolution cannot be studied in a laboratory against a control sample, so, honestly, macro-evolution, in my mind, is just as much a "belief," and not proven science, as creationism. At best, it is a semi-educated guess about a process, that has no philisophical applications and can draw no conclusions as to what, or who, initiated the process. I don't want creation taught in public schools or universities. I simply want every single point of view on current scientific theories of macro-evolution, both positive and negative, the true points, the flaws, and the unanswered questions, the good, the bad, and the ugly, all laid out on the table so students can make up their own minds. Currently, too many scientists, who, despite their claims of purity and objectiveness, often have a political or religious or philisophical axe to grind, simply teach evolution as perfect scientific law and indisputable fact, dismissing any criticism of it. And that's just as bad, if not worse, than rigid biblical creationism in my mind.
