Anyone interested in evolution? Any experts out there?
I'm a creationist, a firm adherent of ID aka Intelligent Design and I personally know the Bible to be 100% true. Every word.
If you are an evolutionist, a naturalist, whatever you may call yourself - I won't bash you. Honestly. I don't know enough to do that.
If it came to a debate, I would lose because I am not yet educated enough to do that, to make any kind of adequate response. Also, winning a debate doesn't make you wrong or right, it only makes the winner feel good about themselves. Either evolution or ID, is right, it's one or the other, they both can't be true. And whichever one is true (I would say ID), is not determined by the results. Hopefully, this is something we can both agree on. So, I'm not even looking to that kind of thing.
I'm looking to broaden my understanding of both sides. If you are perhaps someone who knows more than your average youtuber who thinks they do, if you're interested in some open discussion, I'd invite you to leave a comment. Maybe we can both benefit from this?
16 comments:
Your beliefs can easily accommodate evolution if you simply credit your god with its creation, however evolution is itself undeniable. It is not reasonable to ignore the evidence. Christians once believed that the earth was flat and ignored the evidence to the contrary because it challenged the accepted creed of the time. Please don't fall into that trap, it doesn't support your mission, which seems to be to glorify Jesus, etc. His glory is more profound if evolution is included.
Alright, so I'm glad that you commented. Thank you.
My beliefs cannot accommodate evolution. Either the Bible is completely true or completely false. If it were found to be the least bit false, I'd throw the whole book out. Then, I'd probably kill myself but that is entirely besides the point.
Now, you and I both have worldviews. Generally speaking, most worldviews can be categorized as one of the following: naturalists, which you would fall under, then there are the pantheists (they believe god is one with everything i.e. animals, technology, anything matter, etc.), deists and theists. The difference between the last two is that deists believe that a god or gods would have started the universe, and then just let it run its course. Then there are theists like myself who would say God first started the universe, He started life, and can also choose to intervene and enter in at any time.
So evolution, could fit with the worldview that deists hold, but it simply will never fit with the Bible.
Another reason is that if you had to fit it into the biblical storyline somewhere before Adam and Eve, obviously. The first inconsistency with that is the days of creation - when it reads and God did such and such the nth day, that's talking about a literal day, not millions & billions of years. Second, Romans 6:23 says "The wages of sin is death..." meaning that death only exists as the result of sin. This is relevant because, supposing evolution were true, death would have been one of the main mechanisms, millions and millions of them in fact. All of that, however, would again have to happen prior to the existence of Adam and Eve, who committed the sin.
As a result, not only is it inconsistent with what Genesis teaches, but the whole Book. If it's not because of sin that we receive death, then there's no need for salvation or Jesus for that matter.
The Bible and evolution mix like water and oil. The two stories will never flow as one.
This is already super long, I apologize, but I'm just trying to give an adequate response.
I don't really care which words are used to describe evolution's theoretical dependability; the truth will always prevail. But nothing of the past can ever be proven 100%. At least some faith is required to believe any historical account.
Any evidence that you could suppose as support of evolution is that the same evidence that I could suppose to support the biblical account/ID. The are the clues found through out nature, and also the effects that are visible in world as we know it today. Evidence does not belong to any one side, but rather we are looking for the cause that can give the best account for the available eviendence.
I'm not really interested in a flat earth discussion at all. I honestly don't care who believed the earth was flat and who didn't. Fact is, that's not what the Bible teaches, and it's what the Bible says that I'm concerned with. If you'd like to look more into that here's a few verses to follow up on: Job 26:10, Prov 8:27, Isaiah 40:22, Amos 9:6.
The only response I can give to the rest of your comment is that I strongly disagree.
As a last note I'm really just looking to learn more about evolution in general, OK? I'm not out to prove anyone wrong; that's just not my goal. If you would like to make the case that the evidence is more favourable for evolution, say so, and show me the evidence. Or tell me about people who have. Direct me to books I should be reading, etc, etc.
If you'd like to have this discussion, then let's discuss, be opened minded with the goal of learning in mind, and please, let's try not to make all-inclusive statements because they aren't going to get us anywhere.
Thanks again.
Interesting discussion. Let me throw out a thought for consideration. Genesis 1:11, the third day, gives the account of God creating vegetation and plant life - and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 2 takes us to the 7th day, and we see that (verse 5)the plant life had not yet 'sprung up' because God had not caused rain as of yet, nor was there a man to till the soil. Hmm... vegetation was created on the third day, but yet was not there on the seventh day. How are we to understand this? It was created, but not there - yet. Perhaps God placed the 'building blocks' of this life (plant life) on/in the earth and in time it came to fruition. (no pun intended).
I believe true science and true theology go hand in hand. Troubles arise when our perceptions of understanding do not readily agree with taught or accepted beliefs. Keeping in mind that Gods ways are not mans ways, and the wisdom of man is foolishness to God, I would suggest that much of what God has done and is doing is beyond mans ability to fully comprehend. As Paul said, 'we see as if through a thick glass, dimly. We know in part and we understand in part'.
Let's not cling to long held beliefs simply because they are long held beliefs. May I ask how you perceive Gad? A bearded man in flowing robes sitting on a cloud? If so, I would suggest that is a rather elementary view. (not being arguementative, just exploring different thoughts).
In most schools of Theology the prevailing beliefs are limited to the Assyrian view (free will) and the Calvinist view (predestination) simply because they are the two most generally accepted views. Does that necessarily mean they can be the only view?
Here's a thought: When scripture tells us Adam was the first man God created, can it be possible that it means no more than exactly that? Adam was the first man 'God created'. Philosophically, the use of the word 'man' presupposes man might have existed prior to Adam. Case in point: Adam and Eve have two sons, Cain and Abel. Cain kills Abel and God puts a 'mark' on Cain and banishes him. Cain protests asking God not to mark him 'least any man sees it (the mark) and kills him. "Any man" ??? If you subscribe to the elementary view of Gods creation, there would only be one other man on the planet - Adam. Why then did Abel not say 'least my father see it and kill me'? Abel then goes to the land of Nod (which means 'the land of wanderers') and takes a wife. Where did she come from? Some suggest she was his sister, but we have to reason to accept that as the scripture doesn't say that.
My point being, let's not box God into being limited by our own limited understanding. He is without limit, and far beyond our complete understanding - at least at this point.
So in fact, it's not God you believe in, but the bible?
Is this statement open minded?
"My beliefs cannot accommodate evolution."
Evidence of biblical fallibility. Don't kill yourself, it's just a great book, not god or God. The bible written over centuries by fallible men with human motives, is God?
Well marshaled evidence by a biblical scholar who thought like you, Bart D. Ehrman is the author of more than twenty books, including the New York Times bestselling "Misquoting Jesus" and "God's Problem." Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and is a leading authority on the Bible and the life of Jesus. He has been featured in Time and has appeared on Dateline NBC, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, CNN, the History Channel, major NPR shows, and other top media outlets. He lives in Durham, N.C.
http://bit.ly/bdXdPh
well,i'm Muslim girl and we believe in Jesus as a god messenger and he is the one who told us to follow Mohammed (the last messenger )
Mohammed miracle was (quran) the holy book which remain the same and never changed by human not even a world it's a god guiding book for perfect life style in this earth and to led us to haven after death
@ wrinkledman,
Of course I believe in God. I can't believe the Bible without believing in God.
There's a church called Mars Hill Church in Seattle. It's not my church, and I don't even live in the states, but my beliefs are on the same page with theirs: http://www.marshillchurch.org/about/what-we-believe
Additionally, check out the first 5 verses of John 1, for relating the Word of God to the person of Jesus.
I understand that my statement
"My beliefs cannot accommodate evolution." is not very open minded.
Also, The Bible doesn't accommodate other views. It can't, it wouldn't work or otherwise be true. There's the narrow way (Matt 7:13&14), and it's narrow. Luke 13:24 tells us that many will seek to enter and will not be able. John 14:6 also says, "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'"
I think everyone has a bias, so in fairness I'm just letting you know what mine is.
When I spoke of being "opened minded with the goal of learning", is that I want to look at all the available resources to consider which worldview best fits the evidence. I mean, I don't want to limit myself to resources that only share what I believe.
For example, I've got three books in mind that I'd like to get a hold of to widen my understanding of the whole topic: The Origin of Species, obviously by Charles Darwin, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, and Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer. So two out of three of those books oppose my view.
I think that those who aren't willing to consider opposing views can't really do science, and without doing so a person can only mimic the opinions of others.
I'll keep that one other guy's name in mind. Obviously, there's a few other before him that I'd like to before him. At the same time, it also sounds like he's more out to challenge the gospel than is he focused on the issue of creation.
@ GeekMe.tv
I'm not an expert on these things. I just want to make that clear. So I'm going to point you to some other resources.
First of all, this is what the notes say in my Bible on Genesis 2:4-25 :
"The Man and Woman in the Sanctuary of Eden. The panoramic view of creation in ch. 1 is immediately followed by a complementary account of the sixth day that zooms in on the creation of the human couple, who are placed in the garden of Eden. In style and content this section differs significantly from the previous one; it does not contradict anything in ch. 1, but as a literary flashback it supplies more detail about what was recorded in 1:27. The picture of a sovereign, transcendent deity is complemented by that of a God who is both immanent and personal. The two portrayals of God balance each other, together providing a truer and richer description of his nature than either does on its own. In a similar way, whereas ch. 1 emphasizes the regal character of human beings, ch. 2 highlights their priestly status."
Your second issue was with Cain's wife. Here is a link linkto what Answers in Genesis (AiG) has to say to that.
If the link doesn't work, here's the address. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/who-was-cains-wife.
It's long, but if you're interested, it's a good article.
@oryxland
I'm not sure what you're stance is, but this topic is as much yours to study as it is anyone else's. Y'know, do some research and based on the evidence make a case.
Also, I want you to know truth, and the truth is that there is no gospel outside of the Bible. As I said in replying to another comment, the Bible is narrow. But true none the less.
On the topic of there being no other gospel, this is what Paul says in Galatians 1:
"6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."
The books of Galatians was originally written to Christians in the church of Galatia, sometime around A.D. 48, and not to Muslims. Interestingly enough, however, the message that was given to Mohammed was from an angel.
Keep in mind, I'm just letting you know what the Bible says. If you haven't read the Bible I would encourage you to read it for yourself. I think it's a good starting place if you want to know Life, and also get involved with this discussion.
Oryxland.
Just a quick comment on your post. There is no record in all of Christianity which records Jesus instructing anyone to follow the Prophet.
Scripture, in Christianity, falls into 3 basic translation groups. Literal (word for word), general (conveying the basic theme or intent - less literal), and paraphrased. Taken as a whole, one is able to derive meaning, intent and purpose.
My copy of the Quran (in english language) deals with the same difficulties in translation from language to language as the Bible. There are, and always will be, differing opinions in words chosen to interpret scripture depending on a myriad of beliefs, preferences, social mores, and understanding of the original languag(s).
Quick question: In the Muslim faith Jesus is considered a Prophet, and a wise and learned teacher - but not the Son of God. Can a man be both a Prophet and wise, and be a liar as well? (because in Christian Scripture He does acknowledge His deity.
Graffitigirl,
Your biblical footnotes regardin Genesis 2 are found in numerous biblical translations, however they do not address the issue raised at all.
The verbage sounds nice, but says nothing. This is exactly the reason I said we shouldn't hold to long held beliefs simply because they are long held beliefs. Re-read your post and tell me where the statement addresses, implies, or explains the fact that God created vegetation on the third day, yet it was not there on the seventh day.
I'm not trying to argue, just pointing out that God is - in many ways - far beyond our comprehension. Do not believe that you, I, or anyone else has the definitive understanding of God. If our finite minds could comprehend Him completely, I would suggest that He would be a very small God indeed. But He's not. When I view the pictures provided by the Hubble Space Telescope I am simply amazed and in awe. Our God created all of that. Awesome, no?
Quick question: What would change - regarding God, Jesus, salvation, love for others, etc., etc.. - if we would come to understand that there is much we don't understand about God? Nothing.
When you look at the cosmos and consider that God created all of it, that Jesus is the Messiah, and that the Holy Spirit is actively working in the lives of man and woman according to His purpose, does it make any sense to 'assume' His actions/abilities are somehow limited to what we can logically/rationally comprehend? I think not.
God is far bigger than we can possibly understand. And his ways are far beyond what we can logically decide or assume.
As far as the wife of Cain is concerned, if you would read the reference you suggested, you would see that no facts are presented, but that the conclusions are drawn from assumptions of what man has traditionally chosen to accept as true.
I think you made good choices as far as the three books you're intending to read. I would encourage you to consider that you need not know everything, but never forget Who you know.
Expand your mind, and you will see that God is more than sufficient! And the more you understand this world we live in, the more you'll see just how incredibly awesome God is.
Geek me.tv
i know that you may not like my answer but we believe that people kept switching god words even Jesus words in holy quran he said i'm not a God nether my mother , so the holy quran come as a book that contain all the messages of all god prophets inclodning Jesus and god bless that book so no one can change any thing on it and it's the only book that contian the truth
@ GeekMe.tv
I don't think we're in any disagreement.
Genesis 2:1-3 is the continuation of the Genesis 1 account, whereas Genesis 2:4-25 is a separate account of the same story coming from a different. It doesn't continue along the same timeline as the first account. The second account is the one that I gave you the notes for. That's my best understanding of the two accounts.
I did read the article that I gave you the link for and I agree that there aren't really any facts presented. I do think that they do a better, more in-depth job of explaining than I could do, which is why I referenced them.
The other thing to keep in mind, is that, as far as I know, the Bible is the only book that has historical record of Cain's wife, and maybe also Cain. So they're only extrapolating from what they do know.
Do you know of any other related books that might be worthwhile?
PS If it isn't already clear, I definitely don't think I know everything. Not about God, or nature, or science. Nothing really.
People who think they know everything don't seek to learn, and I only want to learn.
graffitigirl,
Books you might enjoy:
"Mere Christianity" C.S. Lewis
"Ethics" Deitrich Boenhoffer
"Lord of the Flies" William Golding(?)
"Uncle Tom's Cabin" H. B. Stowe
"Lamb" Christopher Moore
"Watership Down"
Thanks! I'll have to look into those!
Oh, one more: "Pagen Christianity"
Tyndale Press.
An good history on the Roman, Jewish, and especially Pagen influences on Christianity and the formation of the (structure) of church and worship. A good historical read that doesn't try to make any derogatory conclusions against the Christian faith, but illustrates how 'church' and worship evolved over the centuries, and why. The distinction between faith in Jesus and 'church' is recognized.
Post a Comment