Re: The wrong horse in evolution education

Where did you get the idea that preterism says there is no hope of heaven?
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: David Opderbeck
  To: Bill Hamilton
  Cc: drsyme@cablespeed.com ; Philtill@aol.com ; dickfischer@verizon.net ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:54 PM
  Subject: Re: The wrong horse in evolution education

  I think the two go hand in hand because they both seek to apply a "literal" hermeneutic. So I don't think the dispensational slant influences the YEC slant so much as they both are influenced by a particular approach to the Bible. Although, many early dispensationalists, following the Scofield Bible notes, believed the gap theory.

  But surely the choice isn't only between dispensationalism and preterism. I can't accept a preterism that says there is no real hope of "heaven." And I think that is one of the underlying fears of folks who are drawn to YEC -- if we starting talking about things like pre-Adamic humans and death before the fall, what is being "restored" after Christ returns?

   
  On 4/18/06, Bill Hamilton <williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com> wrote:
    I have from time to time wondered whether the Dispensationalist interpretation
    of Revelation influences those who hold it to apply a young earth
    interpretation of Genesis.

    --- drsyme@cablespeed.com wrote:

> I think that our understanding of the beginning is related
> to our understanding of the end.
>
> Without getting into a lot of detail, I personally hold a
> preterist view of eschatology. I am not expecting a
> literal new heaven and earth. The old heaven and earth
> was the law, the old covenant. The new heaven and earth
> is the new covenant.
>
> So, not only does that interpretation change ones
> understanding of what a new heaven and earth means, but it
> also changes the time of its fulfillment. In the
> preterist view, the new heaven and earth is here now, it
> is not something to be expected.
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:47:13 -0400
> "David Opderbeck" < dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There's a broader theological question that's been
> >nagging me regarding some
> > of this discussion: how do our views of Adam through
> >Babel relate to
> > eschatology? By eschatology I don't mean to open up
> >cans of worms
> > concerning views of the millenium and such -- I mean the
> >very basic concept
> > that our future in Christ involves a new heaven and new
> >earth, where
> > "[t]here will be no more death or mourning or crying or
> >pain, for the old
> > order of things has passed away." (Rev. 21:4). If we
> >demythologize, so to
> > speak, Adam through Babel, what does that say about our
> >mythos concerning
> > the new heaven and new earth? I think this broad
> >question is more critical
> > at a gut level for many folks than the specifics of how
> >we translate certain
> > words or understand certain names in Genesis.
> >
> > On 4/17/06, Philtill@aol.com < Philtill@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> In a message dated 4/17/2006 5:08:43 PM Eastern
> >>Daylight Time,
> >> williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com writes:
> >>
> >> Phil wrote
> >>
> >> >The momentousness of the occaision makes sense only if
> >>there was a long
> >> period
> >> of time had elapsed >when men **weren't** calling on the
> >>name of the Lord.
> >>
> >> This means there must have been a very long >gap between
> >>Adam and Enosh,
> >> perhaps between Adam and Seth.
> >>
> >> Suppose by "men" the Scriptures mean pre-Adamites? IOW
> >>the covenant
> >> family's
> >> mission finally begins to bear fruit.
> >>
> >> Hi, Bill!
> >>
> >> That's a very interesting idea, and I hadn't thought of
> >>it before.
> >>
> >> Actually, as I think this through, I feel there is
> >>another reasonable
> >> explanation for this verse, one which doesn't
> >>necessarily imply a gap
> >> (although I still believe there was a gap). I think the
> >>statement is part
> >> of the stream toward fulfillment of God's promises to
> >>Eve to bring the Seed
> >> of the woman, the one who will crush the serpent's head.
> >> After A&E were
> >> kicked out of the garden, at least Abel was calling on
> >>Yahweh's name. But
> >> when Eve sees that Abel is dead and Cain has gone bad,
> >>then there seems to
> >> be no hope of fulfillment. But then God opens her womb
> >>and brings another
> >> child, which represents renewed hope that the promise
> >>will be fulfilled. So
> >> the birth of Seth and Enosh represents the renewal of
> >>hope that a savior
> >> will come through Eve. Hence her statement how God has
> >>replace Abel, and
> >> hence also the comment that then men began [again] to
> >>call on the name of
> >> the Lord. This statement "men began to call on the name
> >>of the Lord" would
> >> thus mean that there was a renewed path of descendency
> >>toward the Messiah,
> >> not just the evil ways of the world represented by the
> >>line of Cain.
> >>
> >> By the way, it's an interesting study to write down the
> >>meanings of the
> >> names in Seth's line and the parallel names in Cain's
> >>line, to see how the
> >> latter are twisted versions of the former, giving them a
> >>sinister meaning.
> >> The overall picture of the names in Seth's line is that
> >>they are waiting on
> >> God, hoping in God, trusting and praising him. The
> >>overall picture of names
> >> in Cain's line is that they are building cities,
> >>fighting among the cities,
> >> living under judgement. This is brought to fulfillment
> >>in the parallel
> >> statements of Lamech in each line, where Seth's Lamech
> >>talks of how Noah
> >> will bring the promised rest, and Cain's Lamech talks
> >>how the effects of the
> >> curse have become worse and worse, 70 times 7.
> >>
> >> So after the Bible goes all through Cain's line with the
> >>increasing curse
> >> as humans build cities and develop civilization, then it
> >>tells how Eve bore
> >> another child and praised God that the hope has been
> >>restored. It could be
> >> that there was no gap and it was just presented in this
> >>order to emphasize
> >> the point, or it could be that there was really a gap
> >>and Seth came late
> >> after men had developed all this civilization. The idea
> >>is that Adam came
> >> before all this civilization development, though.
> >>
> >> God bless!
> >> Phil
> >>
> >>
>
>

    Bill Hamilton
    William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
    248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
    "...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Wed Apr 19 00:47:39 2006