Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 38:
Line 38: + + +
Old Earth Creationism (view source)
Revision as of 02:31, November 14, 2014
, 02:31, November 14, 2014added "See also" section, with Literalist Bible chronology listing
{{QuoteBox|[C]onfessedly, it would not have been as readily deduced from the Genesis text had it not been for the evidences advanced by secular science.—J. Barton Payne<ref>J. B. Payne, ''The Theology of the Older Testament'', (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1972, p.136); quoted in Sarfati, Jonathan, "Refuting Compromise", Master Books, March 2004</ref>}}
{{QuoteBox|[C]onfessedly, it would not have been as readily deduced from the Genesis text had it not been for the evidences advanced by secular science.—J. Barton Payne<ref>J. B. Payne, ''The Theology of the Older Testament'', (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1972, p.136); quoted in Sarfati, Jonathan, "Refuting Compromise", Master Books, March 2004</ref>}}
{{QuoteBox|We have to admit here [concerning those who take the six days of Creation as literal days] that the exegetical basis [the arguments from the words of Scripture] of the creationists is strong. … In spite of the careful biblical and scientific research that has accumulated in support of the creationists’ view, there are problems that make the theory wrong to most (including many evangelical) scientists. … Data from various disciplines point to a very old earth and even older universe.’—James Montgomery Boice<ref>Montgomery Boice, J.L., ''Genesis: An Expositional Commentary'', Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1:57–62, 1982; quoted by [[Ken Ham|Ham, Ken]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/324/#r5 The big picture], ''Creation'' 23(2):16–18, March 2001 (their insertions in square parentheses).</ref>}}
{{QuoteBox|We have to admit here [concerning those who take the six days of Creation as literal days] that the exegetical basis [the arguments from the words of Scripture] of the creationists is strong. … In spite of the careful biblical and scientific research that has accumulated in support of the creationists’ view, there are problems that make the theory wrong to most (including many evangelical) scientists. … Data from various disciplines point to a very old earth and even older universe.’—James Montgomery Boice<ref>Montgomery Boice, J.L., ''Genesis: An Expositional Commentary'', Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1:57–62, 1982; quoted by [[Ken Ham|Ham, Ken]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/324/#r5 The big picture], ''Creation'' 23(2):16–18, March 2001 (their insertions in square parentheses).</ref>}}
==See also==
* [[Literalist Bible chronology]]
==External links==
==External links==