Young Earth Creationists or Biblical Creationists?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Allen J Dunckley on March 17, 2010 at 10:43pm

I whole heartedly agree. This could be applied to what is true Christianity -- that is Biblical Christianity.

Permalink Reply by Craig Moir on March 18, 2010 at 1:07am

I agree. The idea that the earth is relatively young is extracted from the belief that Genesis 1-11 (and beyond) is real history. If the Bible is to be understood as read, the earth cannot be very old.

Permalink Reply by Jason Stevens on March 18, 2010 at 3:41am

hey tim, i agree, although "young earth creationist" says what we are in the title, "biblical creationist" is what we are in substance, the bible does give the account of a littoral six day creation and if you do the math of genealogies you get about 6500 years as the age of the earth... humm, on the other side of the coin, if we say biblical creationist, then you leave the possibility of the gap theory to come into play in the future. pray about it, and get more input. thats my two cents ;) God bless.

Permalink Reply by Allen J Dunckley on March 18, 2010 at 8:39am

Jason, you make a good point of clarification. We do need to define ourselves in such a way that does not allow those who would like to compromise Scriputure to accomodate the fallen imaginations of men to feel "comfortable."

Jason Stevens said:

hey tim, i agree, although "young earth creationist" says what we are in the title, "biblical creationist" is what we are in substance, the bible does give the account of a littoral six day creation and if you do the math of genealogies you get about 6500 years as the age of the earth... humm, on the other side of the coin, if we say biblical creationist, then you leave the possibility of the gap theory to come into play in the future. pray about it, and get more input. thats my two cents ;) God bless.

Permalink Reply by Robert V. McCabe on March 18, 2010 at 8:41am

I prefer calling myself a biblical creationists and this is the title I use at Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary to describe our seminary's position. However, one problem is that I know a few who hold to the literary framework view insist that they could label themselves as biblical creationists. This came up at an ETS meeting a couple years back at our Creation Consultation Study Group. The one advantage of the expression Young Earth Creationist is that it reflects that we hold to an earth that was recently created.

Permalink Reply by Floyd Coates on March 18, 2010 at 5:37pm

Rhetoric is everything.

Biblical creationists vs. young earth creationist
pro-lifers vs. anti-abortion rights activist
evolutionists vs. scientists

Permalink Reply by Teresa Beck on March 20, 2010 at 1:53pm

That sounds like a good idea. I'm going to go change the titles of my blogs right now:-)

Permalink Reply by Tim Chaffey on March 20, 2010 at 10:30pm

Thanks for the responses. I actually like to use them interchangeably so that the person I am talking to will equate the two. I think it is very important for us to define the terms of the debate. So I think we should make a concerted effort to use "Biblical Creationist" and be very clear that it refers to a straightforward reading of Genesis 1 - 11. As we know, the Gap Theory, Day-Age, Progressive Creationism, Framework (and any other view) do not qualify as Biblical Creationism.

Permalink Reply by Teresa Beck on March 21, 2010 at 9:31am

Another term I like to use that is very specific is "historical Genesis" or "historical creation and flood," which eliminates any doubt as to where I stand on the reliability of scripture and also effectively eliminates the various long-age creation ideas.

Permalink Reply by Peter Bilmer on March 26, 2010 at 6:47pm

Very good point.
I wanted to ask this question, too. :D
Here some of my suggestions:

1. Biblical literalist

2. Evolution skeptic ( sorry skeptics, WE are the skeptics )

3. Skeptic/doubter of the theory of evolution

There are as much terms as one can find.
Important thing:
Don't let disciples of the theory of evolution label or tag you.
Don't let them determine things.
I'd like to see some rhetoric and dialectic courses for Christians.
Most important thing:
Pray for the Holy Spirit to guide you.

Permalink Reply by Katie Eriksen on March 27, 2010 at 2:12pm

I think you've raised a valid point. I especially like how you use them interchangeably. That's why I continue to call myself a Fundamental Christian. I believe in the fundamentals of the Bible and I don't want to lose that word to those that try to twist it. Then again, I don't particularly like the thought of people adding their own definition of the word to their definition of me.

Permalink Reply by Terrance Egolf on June 3, 2010 at 4:22pm

Katie,

Heh.

Actually, I detest the label "Fundamental Christian", because, at least where I am located, that carries a lot of baggage with it. Blind adherence to biblical doctrine, Scofield Bibles, "no one's going to be in heaven except us Baptists", and the like. I prefer "biblical Christian", and just leave it at that. It leaves the door open to a lot more people. In this age of radical fundamentalism, just the word "fundamentalist" produces a chilling effect, and can even be an avenue for anti-fundamentalist activism.

And @Peter: I would be careful about using "biblical literalist". I believe that the Genesis creation account is literal history, but not all of the Bible is to be taken literally.

Terry

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 22
• Next ›
• Page