There are already classical rabbinic harmonizations between Genesis 1 and 2 which became the standard for Orthodox Judaism.
I need to research and probably bring up this topic.
I haven’t seen that. Mitchell said Jesus would… one other poster just thinks Jesus was probably omniscient. That means he knows everything correctly.
Most have pointed out the old earth young earth question is anachronistic for Jesus. I think Jesus believed as did his contemporaries about creation, but yes, it is entirely an anachronistic issue. The issue was not relevant or even a thing then. Yes Jesus was probably— technically— a “YEC” 2,000 years ago when there was no debate. Would he be one today is the more appropriate question?
Vinnie
1 Like
Would here is as a past tense.
The thing is if one day Scientists change again into let say 200 billions years old what Jesus would have believe might change again and needs to be updated.
Knowing the correct age of the universe in and of itself as a brute fact offers no forgiveness or brings anyone closer to God.
Jesus could change his mind 100x on the age of the earth. If he said “hmm I think raping and murdering babies is good” but then later changed his mind we would have an issue.
We learn brute facts about the universe to worship God, to study his creation. Pure science should be a part of praising and worshipping God. Real science requires change. A good scientist changes with the evidence. Real science doesn’t even work with the idea of “proof.” A bad scientists doesn’t change, much like the bad theologians trying to find a local flood in Genesis or a historical Adam.
And Jesus may have changed his mind twice in scripture. It’s possible the gentile woman he called a dog pushed him in the right direction with her witty response and it’s possible his mother convinced him it was his time at Cana.
Vinnie
Like I said… in the past tense there is no evidence that Jesus ever asked such a question.
And if the moon changes into green cheese then the fairy tale becomes a gospel truth. Science and the universe doesn’t work that way. The evidence does not change and neither does the reality described by the mathematical equations governing the universe. That would be the way things happen in dreams. I suggest that some people need to wake up.
I am just being pragmatic and honest.
Did not mean to discount Bible or Science.
Jesus did prophecy the destruction of the second temple which proven to be correct so far.
And, the amazing prophecy still stands even today.
I have 0 doubts that God, the Father did reveal supernatural things to Christ
Or the prophecy was ex eventu and Mark, our earliest Gospel, was writing after it occurred. But Jesus certainly could have predicted it with or without help from God (supernatural knowledge). Many people could have thought the destruction of the temple would occur. Claiming Rome will one day fall in 77 AD doesn’t mean you have supernatural knowledge of an event because later in 476 AD it did fall. If the temple is corrupt as Mark 11-13 is CLEARLY implying, it’s only natural to expect God’s judgment against it.
So even if it isn’t ex eventu, Jesus’ statement here hardly needs to be supernatural.
Vinnie
No. It means Jesus used well known stories to make a point. Notice the stories are NOT related to creation.
No. That was a joke. As indicated by a 
There is no reason to believe that Jesus confused the creation mythology with real history. I can’t imagine Jesus added the genealogies up without recognizing how much was missing.
1 Like
Yes, but it’s important to understand what the authority and reliability of the Bible actually means when it comes to discussing creation and evolution, or indeed anything else science-related.
In particular, it means this:
¹³Do not have two differing weights in your bag — one heavy, one light. ¹⁴Do not have two differing measures in your house — one large, one small. ¹⁵You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lᴏʀᴅ your God is giving you. ¹⁶For the Lᴏʀᴅ your God detests anyone who does these things, anyone who deals dishonestly. — Deuteronomy 25:13-16
The bottom line is that any creation model, or any attempt to challenge the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth or evolution, must report the physical evidence accurately and interpret it honestly in ways that are mathematically coherent. No matter how strongly you feel about any particular doctrine, if its advocates are having to fudge measurements, quote scientists out of context, misrepresent evidence, or subvert peer review in order to support it, then it is not Biblical, it’s as simple as that.
2 Likes
What is the reason to believe that Jesus Christ didn’t?
Many of His contemporaries, the Rabbis, even those who were born hundreds of years after Him, did explicitly indicate literal belief on the 6 days creation.
How could He believe in something that wouldn’t exist for eighteen hundred years? And as an intelligent classical Jew, how could He not unquestioningly believe His culture’s creation myth? Had He picked up the gap nuance? Possibly. Probably not, it’s just probably not there; the Earth being formless and void just being a linguistic struggle with the half formed concept of non-being. Chaos is more graspable, reachable than absolute nothingness. [It has an ancient, anthropological provenance.]
1 Like
Hello @Shannon, from your response, although you didn’t explicit say a Yes or a No, you indicated a belief that or Lord Jesus Christ, Himself did believe literally on the 6 literal days independent creations of the universe, the earth, animals, and Human species as what the Bible says, therefore we as Christians must adhere to the same view.
This is just what our Christian brothers who believe in YEC always assert: “Jesus and the Bible believe in the YEC, who are you to confront them?”
Even now, I still hope that someday science will be reconciled with the Bible though it doesn’t seem to happen in the next 100 years from how science progresses so far - it still could be beyond our lifetime.
Why I chose Theistic Evolution over Young Earth Creationism?
I had been in a state of denial trying to convince myself that there is no way that Evolution Theory could be true because of the repercussions of what Evolution Theory necessarily implies.
I would forever be in pretension but the literal creationism have adverse effects on the student achievement in science including fields of science that are not seemingly related to Biology or Evolution Theory per se like Physics and Chemistry.
I found that many fundamentals corollaries in Physics like the Law of Conservation of Energy and its derivates like the Law of Conservation of Momentum and other important laws like Relativity Theory when they’re faced with the empirical data and measurements that we have necessarily imply a 13.8 billions years old Universe that are in direct confrontation with the Young Earth Creationism.
The fact that such corollaries cannot accept a Young Earth or Young Universe sets subconscious refutation in Students mind that preclude them from absorbing the Scientific Concepts. This phenomena can be clearly seen from the significant gap in Math, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology subjects between Students who came from non-Christian families and those who believe in Evolution Theory. And, for me this is a huge issue.
I see Young Earth Creationism as the largest single limiting factor that set back Christian students from achieving in Science fields.
This is a huge issue for the US and Christians in developed countries as non-Christian countries like China has shown remarkable exponential development in Economy, Science, and Technology. At one point, if the trends are not reverse China may overlap the US.
And, the issue is even larger for Christians in poor Countries where Evolution Theory is not acceptable at all. People who believe in Evolution Theory, there, are often ridiculed as “Apes Children”, “Monkey Man.”
I hope you can see why I chose Evolution Theory even in light of the Word of God.
This is a part of a larger question of the relation between Christ in His mortal presence and the Divinity that He temporarily left when He descended as Human - the coexistence of Christ Divinity and Humanity.
Christ, in His Divinity, has a perfect knowledge of the state of the Universe which He always retains even during His mortal presence.
But, did humanly Jesus Christ retain this part of knowledge during His ministry?
I took this as a Yes to my question.
This is the very point that I asked to people who answered with a No.
Saying Young Earth Creationism is a recent notion or a recent thing of modern times is the same as saying America was found in 15th century by Columbus and hence referring to the Continent between Atlantic and Pacific before 15th century is anachronistic because it was found in 1492 by Christopher Columbus.
Saying Young Earth Creationism is a recent notion or a recent thing of modern times is the same as saying America was found in 15th century by Columbus and hence referring to the Continent between Atlantic and Pacific before 15th century as America is anachronistic because it was not found until 1492 by Christopher Columbus.
Jesus was not the meta-infinite, meta-eternal Second Person of the Holy and Undivided Trinity collapsed in to a supernatural sperm, once and for all space-times.
And if He absurdly were, why would He bring a fundamentalist anti-science reactionary anachronistic worldview back from the future that hadn’t happened?
Absurdity upon absurdity upon absurdity.
For me: He is the infinite, eternal Second Person of the Holy Trinity, Lord and Savior, God Himself incarnated into Human flesh, and now seated at the Right Hand of the Father.
God didn’t create the Universe instantaneously as how it might seem from the Book of Genesis because He is all consistent.
Why didn’t Christ foretell about this controversy (YEC vs Evolution Theory)?
Didn’t Christ know already if such a big controversy would arise in the future?
Or, in more general terms: why didn’t Christ mention something like saying about Quarks or the Atomic Nuclei or Gravitational force or anything miraculous that will draw billions of people or probably the majority of mankind to come to Him?
Or, in further more general terms: why God chose the incarnation to happen in the first century AD instead of in the year 2021 so people can take pictures of him being resurrected and ascended to heaven and billions of people would come to Him?
These are the questions that I don’t know what the answers would be.
Thanks
It seems to me that you, @Klax, don’t believe that Lord Jesus Christ was resurrected from the death and ascended to the Heaven.
I don’t know how can people who do not believe in the historicity of resurrection and ascension be classified as Christian. But, most of the Swiss and many of the Pastors here do not - I’ve lived in Geneva Switzerland for more than 3 years, now.
With all due respect, I believe that literal belief in the Nicene Creed which includes Christ resurrection and ascension as the necessary requirement of Christian faith.