Ken Ham vs Hugh Ross Young or Old earth debate on TBN

Discussions on creation beliefs within Christianity, and topics related to creation.
User avatar
abelcainsbrother
Ultimate Member
Posts: 4046
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Gap Theory

Ken Ham vs Hugh Ross Young or Old earth debate on TBN

Postby abelcainsbrother » Sun Nov 01, 2015 12:21 pm

Have you ever seen this debate with Ken Ham and Hugh Ross about 2 years ago on TBN? I thought Ken Ham was being rude to Hugh Ross and relied more on young earth dogma to make his case than the word of God.I thought Hugh Ross was the one using scripture to make his case.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUHNz6bUSIU
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.

DanielPech
Acquainted Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 11:46 am
Christian: Yes
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Contact:

Re: Ken Ham vs Hugh Ross Young or Old earth debate on TBN

Postby DanielPech » Sun Jul 31, 2016 1:19 pm

When opposing each other, I do not see either man as knowing much more than their own dogma. I am mostly on the side of Ken Ham, in that my own position is Young Earth and Young Cosmos (no gaps there, either). But I find a number of Ross's teachings theologically spot-on, especially some of those of his teachings that concern the Earth as a living planet.

User avatar
Philip
Board Moderator
Posts: 5286
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:45 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Betwixt the Sea and the Mountains

Re: Ken Ham vs Hugh Ross Young or Old earth debate on TBN

Postby Philip » Sun Jul 31, 2016 3:35 pm

The biggest problem with Hugh Ross - and I really appreciate so much of what he's written AND as I believe in an old universe - is that he reads science into too many Bible passages, ones in which scientific meanings were not likely intended. This is because he's lacking in theological and ancient Hebrew training. That said, however, I do agree with Ross that God allowed man to discover, develop, and confirm the remarkably consistent and often highly reliable (yet imperfect) methodologies of the scientific method, and that even though these have limitations, we shouldn't ignore its strong correlations as it pertains to the study of God's Creation, as Scripture describes it as ANOTHER testimony.

I would think that the intensive and vast studies of what God tells us is this other testimony would not greatly mislead us when such an enormous amount of data from so many different fields of scientific disciplines comprehensively correlate on so many levels. As if the Creation is a testimony, why would it at least APPEAR misleading, even if it wasn't meant to, to so many of the world's scientists sincerely and diligently seeking to understand its many truths and mysteries? God gave us this long-validated methodology of sifting data, are we to ignore its conclusions - ESPECIALLY where they MASSIVELY correlate? I believe that many who so easily and casually dismiss the overwhelming conclusions of science concerning the age of the earth are ignorant of the immense data from so many scientific fields that have provided an overwhelming consensus that the earth and universe are in the billions of years in age. BTW, I also reject macro-evolutionary evolution between species. But you also can't read the Bible as a science book, even though some of it may well yield some scientific understandings. And so many who insist that certain key passages of the Bible ARE speaking of science, as they insist upon a CERTAIN supposed theological SCIENCE views, would definitely be wrong if such passages were not meant to address scientific understandings to a pre-scientific age people (which is HIGHLY unlikely). Lastly, Scripture wasn't written ONLY for that pre-scientific world, but also for you and me, living in the scientific/technological age.


Return to “Creation Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests