Theological Problems with God-guided Evolution

[one.opinion]

31 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Exegesis is one of the first things people learn in Seminary so that they don't misinterpret the Bible.  You won't even investigate? 

I understand the concepts, but I disagree with your ultimate conclusions. There is no need for me to investigate.

What I’d really like to know is what you agree with or disagree with in the original post.

[teddyv]

On the matter of exi- or eisegesis in the context of this discussion, it has appeared to me that YEC fails to consider the original context and audience of the early parts of Genesis. Much of the modern YEC seems deeply rooted in modernity and reading history of Bronze-age literature within our very analytical and chronological view of history.

[Sparks]

4 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

I understand the concepts, but I disagree with your ultimate conclusions. There is no need for me to investigate.

You have an opportunity to learn to how to objectively read the Bible but you have instead chosen wilful ignorance.  Does the truth matter to you?

[AandW_Rootbeer]

19 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Agreed. However, the degree does signify an advanced state of learning in a particular field. The fact that learned men and women have studied these issues and still arrived at different conclusions tends to nullify claims like “This passage is clear to me, so you are wrong for disagreeing with me.”

We are committing proper action by always questioning the idealism's of learned men, but are we holding to God's understanding by questioning the Word of God?   If we were equal to God as we are to man, is it possible to hold God accountable for how we view His Written Word?   Job was reprimanded when God asked him, "who was he to question God?"   Are we not committing the same grievance by assuming we are able to question the Word of God?

[Sparks]

11 minutes ago, teddyv said:

On the matter of exi- or eisegesis in the context of this discussion, it has appeared to me that YEC fails to consider the original context and audience of the early parts of Genesis. Much of the modern YEC seems deeply rooted in modernity and reading history of Bronze-age literature within our very analytical and chronological view of history.

The irony.

There are few here on this thread who have considered the original context of Genesis and it's audience, but it is not the theological evolutionists.  You are supposed to take the Bible literally (that's one of the first laws of hermeneutics), but the evolutionists don't.

[one.opinion]

4 minutes ago, Sparks said:

You have an opportunity to learn to how to objectively read the Bible but you have instead chosen wilful ignorance.  Does the truth matter to you?

I understand the difference between the terms. I’m just not taking hermeneutical lessons from you.

[one.opinion]

7 minutes ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

Are we not committing the same grievance by assuming we are able to question the Word of God?

Please take a trip back to the OP to see what I am or am not questioning.

[Sparks]

5 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

I understand the difference between the terms. I’m just not taking hermeneutical lessons from you.

I invited you to study on your own, and you said you won't.

[one.opinion]

15 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I invited you to study on your own, and you said you won't.

If you gathered that from my comments, then I didn’t speak clearly. I am always open to study.

[Sparks]

29 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

If you gathered that from my comments, then I didn’t speak clearly. I am always open to study.

I did gather it.  You literally said there was no need to investigate it which means you turned down studying it.  But by all means, research it if that is your desire.