Creation or AntiGenesis?

Antigenesis: You believe in Christ, but you don't believe the Genesis account.

Creation:You believe the whole Bible, including Genesis

Evolution:You don't believe in Christ or Creation

SSSincerely,

Snake(I am a Creationist)

Me too GodsCoelacanth.

If you have a concordance, look up some of the words used in Gen ch 1 - for example the difference in 'light' ( 1 v 3 ) compared to that in used in 1 v 14-18 . It'll open up a whole new world for you. 'Moved ' in c 1 v 2. It's all very intriguing.

I thought this club was dead! Nice to see some movement.

I'm not really sure what the original question is.

what are you? Yep, I usually ask Les what clubs need breathe

There are also OEC (Old Earth Creationists), who believe that God created the earth in millions of years instead of a week.

STOP CORRECTING MY FORUMS!!!! LOL

   I believe the Scriptures are the perfect Word  of God and that he has preserved it perfectly for  every generation as promised in Psalm 12. 
   Therefore I believe that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and created the heavens and the Earth and all things therein exactly as written (and yes, that means six 24hour days) in Genesis 1.

I am a creationist. Two books I particularly like:

The first one is "Creation: Facts of Life" by Dr. Gary Parker. His life is an interesting narrative because he has a Ph D. (in Geology if I remember) and was looking for evidence to "prove" the Biblical account of creation as false; he was a atheist. 

However, he undoubtedly had a real motivation to find truth; in his search, he simply acquired more and more overwhelming scientific evidence to support the creationist account and it ultimately lead him to becoming Christian. His book gives a unique perspective as he can attest to what an atheist and evolutionist (he was both) believed and why. 

The second book is "The Lie: Evolution" by Ken Ham. This book offers many scientific problems with the theory of evolution which are easily explainable for a creationist. Ken Ham is also the CEO and founder of Answers in Genesis-US, of the Creation Museum in Kentucky, USA, as well as The Ark Encounter (another museum built as a representation of Noah's Ark, 510 feet [155 m] long, 85 feet [26 m] wide, and 51 feet [16 m] high). 

Both The Creation Museum and The Ark Encounter I've visited (both are in Kentucky USA and I spent an entire day at each location) I highly recommend to any Christian believer or anyone interested in the science supporting the creationist account of Genesis in the Bible.

Creationist all the way

I also went there! It was amazing! Especially loading up on souvenir pennies!

Just to add, believing in evolution does not necessarily preclude being a Christian (as one is saved by faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior alone). There is a category called "Evolutionary Theists" who believe in both the God of the Bible and macroevolution.

I personally am a creationist (Old Earth).

Thanks,

KoA

   There are heresies, and then there are damnable heresies. A heresy is simply an error in doctrine, but a damnable heresy is one so serious that to believe it would preclude you from believing the gospel.

   To believe in old earth theology is a damnable heresy, for to believe that God used evolution to bring us about is to deny that there ever was an Adam and therefore that there ever was an Eve. To deny that is to deny the fall and to deny the fall is to deny the Redemption that is provided through Christ's blood sacrificed willingly on our behalf. Without the literal interpretation of Genesis the Gospel falls apart line a leper on a pogo stick.

   I'm sure many people have received the Gospel of Jesus Christ and afterwards have been poorly discipled and may even not believe the first three or nine chapters of Genesis, but I would seriously doubt that anyone comes to saving faith in Christ while simultaneously denying the truth of Genesis (or any Scripture).

Agreed

John 3 and Romans 10 don't include believing anything in the Old Testament as being necessary to be saved. One can believe humans are flawed without believing in a literal Adam and Eve. Of course, not believing in the OT but believing in Jesus as Lord and Savior would involve some rather complex and (in my opinion) jumbled logic, but Paul's letters, nor what Jesus said, suggests that believing in a non-literal Genesis excludes one from God's grace.

Of course, this point is moot in my case, as I do believe there was a literal Adam and Eve (OEC views differs with evolutionary theists on this point).

Thanks,

KoA

   My point was not that believing in a literal reading of Genesis 1-3 is required for salvation, but as you said, it would be illogical to believe the Gospel if you refused to believe Genesis as written.

OEC still believe there was a historical Adam and the Fall. The bottom line and most important is whether someone accepts the atoning work of Jesus's death and resurrection and believes in Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

And yet the irony is that most who think they are reading Genesis "literally," usually aren't, but are erroneously reading Genesis anachronistically by trying to read Post-Enlightenment ideas back into the Bible instead of properly interpreting in the historical, biblical context in which it was written. But people don't want to hear that.

   Because it's a load of crap.

   People are funny that way.