This is the basis for a heresy claim made by YEC people. Well, one I know (Richard Swindell). I am trying to understand their (his) argument. In his first argument here he gives an example of Jesus referring to a well known (well known to the Jews) event in history and calls it a statement about science. He then draws a conclusion. He also concludes that anyone who interprets differently is calling Jesus a liar. Thus they deny the divinity of Jesus and are therefore heretics. It seems like that is his logic.
Richard Swindell says,
Whenever the Bible makes a statement with respect to science, it speaks with perfect accuracy, since it is the Word of God and the words of God.
Billy (Graham) was a man of God. Doesn’t mean he was right about everything.
If the world is billions of years old, and Genesis 1-11 is mytho-history, then Jesus was either too ignorant or stupid to have understood billions of years and evolution or progressive creation, or He thought the people were too ignorant or stupid to understand it, so He deliberately spoke as if Genesis 1:1-2:3 and Genesis 1-11 was actual literal history at least 15 times.
If your Jesus is Lord, and the One through Whom the Father created all life and the Universe but ignorant or stupid about how and when it happened, or is a deliberate deceiver, He is not the Jesus of Scripture.
He gives some examples to Andy Witt:
Andy Witt Matthew 24: 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark;
39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
Matthew 23: 35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
If Cain and Abel were real, so was Adam, real.
A few general examples:
Matthew 22:21; Mark 12:17; Luke 20:25—mankind is in the image of God.
Matthew 23:35; Luke 11:51—Jesus references Abel as a historical, righteous person, and the first of the martyrs.
Matthew 24:37–39; Luke 17:26–27—Jesus compares His coming to the time of Noah’s Flood.
Matthew 26:52—Jesus references Genesis 9:6 when he says “Those who draw the sword will die by the sword.”
Mark 13:19—Jesus references God creating the world.
Luke 10:19—Jesus gives the disciples authority to tread on serpents.
John 8:44—The devil is a liar and a murderer ‘from the beginning’
Richard Swindell none of these statements require reference to history. For instance, Mt 24:38-39 is making a literary reference to help us understand the coming of the Son of Man; this is true regardless
Andy Witt Yeah, it doesn’t take rocket science to understand that someone could be poetic and turn to popular knowledge to make a point. We do that all the time. This kind of arguing about whether Jesus was ignorant or lying or not reminds me of what happened to Sisyphus. … for example.
Robert Lindberg in case you don’t understand the Scriptures, Jesus was “God incarnate”, i.e., God in human form. Jesus KNEW who he was and his only “limitation” was being in human form, having flesh & blood, etc. JESUS was there at Creation!
Hence, Jesus knows the REAL history. IF you don’t accept that Jesus is God, or that God doesn’t exist… then your comments are totally irrelevant.
Andy Witt Do you believe the flood killed every human being, and every living thing with breath in its nostils that lived on land, as Genesis tells us and as Jesus believed.
Or do you believe in many local floods?
Richard Swindell How many years after the Flood did it take for the three sons of Noah to repopulate the entire world?
Steven Robinson “Hence, Jesus knows the REAL history. IF you don’t accept that Jesus is God, or that God doesn’t exist… then your comments are totally irrelevant.”
That doesn’t seem to be the issue. People are making similar comments about Billy Graham, because he said about what I said. The real issue here appears to be NOT whether one believes in God or in Jesus, but rather whether one believes in Ellen White.
OK, after looking at the scriptures he quotes I realized Richard is not making a valid argument. His hermeneutics are flawed. Later I may go into why they are flawed.
This is mind draining and soul draining to me. It is such an impediment to faith. A stumbling block.