What the original audience would consider as authoritative isn’t the same as what you would consider as authoritative. And only that initial understanding can be considered inspired. Remember “the Bible was written for us, but not to us”
So WHY do you think the gospels represent TRUTH, when you just explained
why you tolerate a Matthew who did NOT predict the fall of Jerusalem, but wrote
about the Fall AS IF he predicted it?
**Sounds like you are in the business of taking the GOSPELS figuratively!**
Yeah, so no more with the cutting and pasting AI stuff. Find a real human saying what you want to say whose credentials we can evaluate.
1 Like
The point was not to predict the fall of the temple but the coming end times, which are yet to come. The other references were more to point out He would rise in 3 days, which He did.
That relies on two things
1 the existence of that quote (or being able to find it)
2 The ad-hominum opinion of the person who quoted it.
AI has one basic function. It can correlate, identify and rationalise more data that we can and present it in a cohesive and simple manner that all can understand. As such it presents an unbiased and neutral answer
It seems a shame not to be able to use this resource, or to have to camouflage its use.
Richard
That is a misunderstanding. Current language models just repeat what they have seen in the learning material and may invent fake sources and claims to compose something that may look fine but is a fictional story - some would say that AI lies but as it does not have understanding, it just tells rubbish. If the learning material was biased, also the answers are biased - a feature that at least Russia has utilized.
What is true is that it can compose answers that look cohesive and simple. What is told in those answers is another matter as it may be seriously biased or even fictional (‘alternate truths’).
4 Likes
Laura has started a specific thread on the subject, perhaps we should adjourn from here.
Richard
1 Like
I work with AI tools in my job and am well aware of its potential benefits, weaknesses, and ethical problems. But the fact remains that cutting and pasting large chunks of text into a discussion forum has never been a good way to have an intelligent or engaging conversation. It’s a form of information dumping, it’s not discussing. Smart people don’t want to learn new things from strangers who quote AI summaries to them anyway, they want to learn from reliable sources written by vetted experts. You are more than welcome to “use this resource” to educate yourself. What we are fed up with is all the people trying to use this resource to outsource their mansplaining.
1 Like
How do you handle the view of creation set out in the Westminster Confession? I get a lot of vibes from people at my “new” church (PCA) that YEC is an absolute.
I listened to Jonathan Leger’s 26:22 Youtube MY STORY: From Cult to Atheist to Agnostic to Christ.
On an impulse, I looked up his book in Amazon: The Broken Mirror: Rediscovering Our True Nature in Christ Paperback – June 5, 2025,
-
“What if everything you’ve been told about your spiritual identity has been only half the story?
For centuries, countless believers have lived with a diminished understanding of who they truly are—seeing themselves as merely forgiven sinners struggling toward heaven, rather than restored image-bearers designed to radiate divine light here and now.
In The Broken Mirror, Jonathan Leger unveils a transformative truth that has been hiding in plain sight throughout Scripture: You were created as a mirror, designed to reflect God’s very nature. Though sin shattered that reflection, Christ came not just to forgive, but to restore you to your original glory—and beyond.
Drawing from biblical texts, ancient Church wisdom, and profound spiritual insights, this book reveals:
• Why “Christ in you” is not just a metaphor, but the most radical reality of your existence
• How participating in divine nature transforms everything from morning coffee to eternal destiny
• Why creation itself is waiting for you to discover who you truly are
• The difference between trying to generate your own light and learning to reflect HisThis isn’t about becoming God—it’s about finally understanding what it means to be fully, gloriously human as God intended. Through vivid imagery and careful theology, Leger guides readers from Eden’s original design through Calvary’s restoration to Revelation’s breathtaking culmination, showing how broken mirrors can shine with heaven’s own light.
Whether you’ve spent decades in church or are just beginning your spiritual journey, The Broken Mirror will revolutionize how you see yourself, energize your daily life with eternal purpose, and awaken you to an inheritance far richer than you’ve ever dared imagine.
Discover the truth that changes everything: The Light of the World lives in you. It’s time to shine.”
From Jehovah’s Witness to atheist to agnostic to Christ sounds interesting. Ultimately led to Jonathan Leger Podcast.
1 Like
The Westminster Confession does state “in the space of six days”, but given that YEC was not a standard position for major groups of Presbyterians that I have heard about beliefs of between about c. 1800 and c. 1960, and the lack of an offical position on the issue from many Presbyterian denominations, it does not seem to generally be viewed as a requirement.
At least most Presbyterian denominations do not demand absolute adherence to every clause of the confession (for pastors, the requirements are fairly minimal for members), but will allow some leeway on less important ones (or, in the case of some presbyteries in the PCUSA, way too much leeway on all of them). As to specific denominations within American Presbyterianism (larger English-speaking ones at least), from what I have heard and a quick glance at the ones that I did not know, the PCA definitely does not require YEC (e.g., Tim Keller), the EPC and ECO (newer split-offs from the PCUSA) definitely don’t require it either.
The ARP explicitly denies most formulations of EC/TE views (someone who was TE/EC with a day-age view of Genesis 1 and affirming special direct creation of Adam and Eve could probably affirm the official position they put out, perhaps with some qualms about phrasing).
I can’t immediately find a position being stated by the OPC, but they’re old enough that they probably don’t take a position on it.
I also can’t find something online from the CREC, but they probably officially affirm YEC, given who is prominent in the CREC.
Nor from the RPCNA.
2 Likes
At least on the surface, this sounds very similar to NT Wright’s views on the Kingdom of God, and our roles as image bearer’s. Are you familiar with it? If so, are you familiar enough with Leger’s work to compare and constrast?
Thanks, Timothy.
I am a Baptist out of water. (Yes. That was a terrible attempt at a terrible pun.)
So you won’t be qualifying any time soon as a ruling or teaching elder, I take it..
3 Likes
Probably that would mostly be because I’m 21, though. My grandfather is a ruling elder emeritus (i.e., semi-retired elder) in the church that we attend, and he basically has the same level of agreement with the Westminster Confession that I do. I can only offhand think of three or four clauses that I would take issue with (exact phrasing for the one on creation; phrasing for transmission of original sin sounding too much like the homunculous theory; the one that’s almost never enforced strictly on people today that includes “no recreation on the sabbath”; and at least one “I agree with the statement, but don’t think the verse cited is a good one to support it.”).
2 Likes
Here’s a more precise description of the two major branches of the American Presbyterians. Naturally, they disagree!
The term “Presbyterian” in the US generally refers to two major denominations with different stances on this issue:
-
Presbyterian Church (USA) (PC(USA)): The more mainline and liberal PC(USA) does not mandate a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account. The church embraces a wide diversity of views, often treating the creation story as a poetical or theological framework for understanding God as the creator, rather than a factual scientific or historical timeline. Theistic evolution is a widely accepted view within the PC(USA).
-
Presbyterian Church in America (PCA): The more theologically and socially conservative PCA is a confessional church that adheres to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which states that God created the world “in the space of six days”. While the historic position favors a literal, six 24-hour day creation (Young Earth Creationism), the denomination’s official position, after a 2000 study, allows for a “diversity of views” (including day-age and framework interpretations, which are Old Earth Creationism views) as acceptable, provided ministers affirm the core doctrine that God is the creator. However, the literal 24-hour day view remains a significant and often dominant position in the PCA.
Presbyterians debate meaning of 6-day Creation – Deseret News .
2 Likes
Thanks! This is helpful.
I’ll mostly agree with that. Given that prior to the 1960s (before the PCA existed) a post-existence-of-geology-type YEC view was basically limited to the SDA, a few fundamentalist Lutheran groups, and a few fundamentalist Baptist groups, the term “historic position” is a bit misleading. Also given that they’ve had EC/TE-affirming elders since the beginning (the earliest one I know of offhand was ordained in 1976, but that’s based on a tiny sample size), it’s not a new development.
They also don’t consistently mandate that their elders not be openly heretical (they still officially hold to the Westminster Confession, Scots Confession, and several others; they just don’t enforce them well). And by “openly heretical”, I mean openly denying the divinity of Christ or the Resurrection, or things like that.
There are efforts from within–that seem to be gaining some momentum–to fix that problem, though.
Yikes! Even as a U.U. heretic, I would not expect any good mainstream church to allow the denial of Christ’s divinity!
3 Likes
It seems lost given the sway figures such as Ken Ham hold over modern evangelicalism, that prior to the eighties, acceptance of an ancient earth may have been dominant even among holders of strict inerrancy. The Scofield Reference Bible, then the Bible thumpers Bible with its dispensationalist outlook, formally advocated for the gap theory. Intervarsity Press (IVP) published books sympathetic to old earth interpretations. Norman Geisler’s textbook on Apologetics was a standard in fundamentalist Bible colleges and suggested approaches allowing for the age of the Earth. Gleason Archer defended inerrancy along with a day age approach to Genesis. Nobody I recall, pastor or teacher, thought there were dinosaurs on the ark - however they were gone before then, they were gone.
Now, these efforts were to prove not very satisfactory or robust. Large scale evolution was verboten. The garden and the flood were literal. But the alternate reality of YEC had not yet taken over as a badge of membership in chapel of literalism.
6 Likes